Important notice regarding this blog! Please read through before interacting with me so we can avoid conflict and all have a very fun time! You'll find my normal intro here.
What you can do:
Share anything Milgram related you think I would like! (Analysis and art of my favs are always welcome, posts defending Milgram's writing also welcome etc... I have a strong preference for seeing the more positive side of the fandom)
Request Milgram related art! (It's allowed but I won't say I'm very diligent with that. I've got requests sitting in my inbox for months... I'm far more likely to fulfil requests involving Fuuta, Amane, Muu, Yuno and Es. I draw 0308 fastest probably cuz I draw them most...)
Suggest something for my weekly Fuuta polls! (I'm going with a more 0308 theme at the moment.)
Ask me about any of my AUs--Puppet Strings in particular but also if you're intrigued by any of the art I posted at any point, feel free to ask.
What you shouldn't do:
Send hate to my inbox. This is a general boundary I'm going to set. Using comments, reblogs, vague posting or any other way to be hurtful will not be tolerated. (A year ago I would not have thought this would be necessary but apparently it is.)
Criticize Milgram (whether its the writing or the characters) in places I can't avoid easily (comments, reblogs, inbox etc). I do not think Milgram or the characters are flawless but I don't want to be jump scared by things I may find upsetting. (This rule will not be as applicable to mutuals I talk to frequently because I think you probably know where my boundaries are.)
Bash Amane. This is technically part of the point above. But I wanted to make this extra clear. It is immature loser behavior to go out of your way to bash Amane on my posts or in my inbox. (And its not the good kind of loser)
Under the cut I will be going through what I will be doing with this blog moving forward. (At the very least during Amane's trial.)
I will:
Post 'Forgive Amane' propaganda art!
Continue to post my usual stuff (non-propaganda art, things related to writing, my AUs and WIPs, silly polls, friend shenanigans... I will still post 'opinionated posts' about silly things like my crash out out over a cute minigram.)
Possibly post analysis if I feel like it (but with a neutral tone as much as possible)...
Give a heads up if/when I break my own rules for myself (see below)
I will not (or try not to):
Post about strong personal opinions. (Meaning anything strictly opinionated as in 'likes' and 'dislikes', or comment on the morality of a character. This is for myself to avoid oversharing and avoid feeling personally attacked in case of disagreement.)
Talk about controversial topics or participate in any voting discourse (Maybe this contradicts how I will post forgive Amane art. But I mean, I won't stop drawing or writing things that portray her in a fair and/or positive light. I only mean I won't be arguing people about voting--not that I think I really did that anyway)
For those who are familiar with this blog, you'll know that I am a Fuuta fanatic. But even for his trial I didn't set boundaries like this and yet I'm drawing the line for Amane. I hope that you understand that I really really need these boundaries to be respected. There are themes in her case which are sore spots for me but as long as you adhere to my boundaries when interacting with me, we will be able to have a fun time, thank you for your understanding.
Sorry, for dropping this so late and after going on a reblog spree that probably makes an aspect of my opinions quite clear? I'm breaking the rule I set for myself to avoid posting about my opinions. I did set these rules for myself to hopefully reduce inbox harassment but I was reminded that I can turn off anon asks. So. Um. Yeah. (The rest of the rules are still valid).
Here's your warning that I am going to be jumping into the trenches? Not gonna make original posts on my opinions the discourse for now. I think I'll save that for the essay where I plan to compile all the different views I can access and try to evaluate em all neutrally if that's a possible task. But you might see this blog going round poking people for their opinions. And I will continue to reblog posts the way I have been doing but in a less "shoves this post i found informative down your throat" way. (I admit I was a bit overkill to reblog them so closely back to back considering the usual nature of my blog... it was a knee jerk reaction. sorry for that.)
I will try to tag all the future ones with #discourse (not voting discourse cuz um its not rlly about voting anymore). Filter it out if you don't wanna see. I will continue to do some silly posting and maybe art if I've got any.
Heyya! I saw you on another user's askbox saying you are doing some sort of analysis/essay on the writing vs fandom of MILGRAM. I would love to read it when it's ready! (I also have thoughts about it.... Yuno fan here..... staying strong /hj)
Hiya!! Thank you for taking interest, I worry it will be a rather controversial topic if not done carefully so I plan to do my best to consult many different opinions as I'm writing... Of course, I'm gonna make sure to get explicit permission for necessary stuff like quoting when I need it.
I've saved links of interviews and other sources in a document, made some notes and mapped structure roughly but otherwise it's still a very undeveloped plan. I mean to say, it's gonna take a while... orz. But I can say, I do plan to dive into "author's intention vs audience reception -> impact" for every single prisoner. Es and Jackalope too if I can get enough on them.
I really want to find the objective correct answer for my questions but I know that's not possible. But hopefully asking around and bothering people for their thoughts can help me to find my right answer. That said, I plan on being fairly neutral in the essay. It's not to say I don't have my own opinions but rather I want to make myself play devil's advocate to match how much I defend stances I lean towards more. If that makes sense? And well, who knows maybe I'll change my mind on some things.
I've seen some of your posts about Milgram thanks to a mutual reblogging them! That said, I'd love to interrogate you more on your thoughts... Especially Yuno but in general would also be great. If you could care to humor me, what do you think Yamanaka's actual intentions were? And is the audience reception more of the responsibility of the fandom or the author's responsibility to make his intentions clearer? And as for the impact on the audience, there were many people who make their upset/outrage very clear, how much of that is a fair response? (I'll throw it out there, I definitely think the personal insults and threats towards Yamanaka was way too far when Life just dropped.... And now too... Hoping no one will come after me for saying this)
Hang in there! T3's been turbulent to say the least but I have faith in us. Final stretch soon!!
Ways Mikoto actually SUBVERTS the typical "DID murderer" Trope
> story centers on how the condition affects his daily life BEFORE it reveals the "horror," making Mikoto a well-rounded and popular character by showing both his genuine side and emotional baggage to a sympathetic audience; he was literally designed to be looked at past the surface level.
>the ambiguity of "who committed the crime" is so muddy and vague that even Es (character) pins it on the one who showed overt traits of violence/anger as they calm Mikoto down. This shows how outside people tend to pick and choose parts and box them into categories. It's MIKOTO HIMSELF, the one speaking to Es, whoever he "is" "inside," taking direct responsibility for his actions. The muddiness of "who's who" in Mikoto's system is VERY REALISTIC and imo likely intentional.
>Mikoto's fear and remorse are legitimate. They put extra effort into showing how he swore it was all a bad dream, how hard his brain tried to forget. He really is a normal guy who gave in to a crazy impulsr; yes he's accountable, but he's rightfully frightened nonetheless.
> the point is not "DID makes this guy kill people and forget, how scary!!!" The point is, in my opinion, "working class people are routinely put in danger by a system that rewards shoving aside health and wellness for success and notoriety, making people seek pain relief in more and more extreme ways; no one is guaranteed to be safe from the tidal wave of a sick human beings with nowhere to aim their frustration."
> "if it's about work culture then maybe don't put DID in." Millions, if not billions, of people are growing up until hostile, dangerous environments, and have been for generations. The working class is gonna have a pool of people with DID. The story would be less interesting if Mikoto remembered snappping; also, I imagine that the truth would have got him triple-guilty'd IMMEDIATELY if we didn't know Mikoto like we do now. That's my last point: the amnesia and presence of other self-states is explicitly used to elevate the narrative and add complexity, not just for shock value.
Just my interpretation but we Highly recommend media analysis, it's way more fun than knee-jerk reactions
okay thank GOD you think mikoto t3 is good i do too but the entire fandom made me feel like i was going insane
do not fear anon i will put you in a loving blanket for being good takes gang. we will save you
as far as ive seen of the fandom response a large bulk of the backlash is because people are pressed that mikoto doesn't seem to fit the etiology of DID as concieved in america (i.e. seemingly uneventful family life, positive relationships and prospects until he started at his job). but i will never understand people that care more about characters conforming to psychiatric constructs than about being portrayed as people – this is how we get people arguing that Split is good rep because it superficially hits each diagnostic criterion [1, 2].
that's also not even accounting for the fact that a lot of the fandom appears totally unwilling to entertain the fact that you can be predisposed to a complex dissociative disorder even with relatively normative childhood experiences, since normative is relative, and does not necessarily mean 'not damaging to development', especially if e.g. being raised in a way that encourages dissociative internal structures may even help the child to perform tasks and roles expected of them more effectively (up until it doesn't, such as after a severe breakdown as a result of later trauma that meshes badly with / exacerbates weaknesses in the person's current internal structure). people forget that what is pathological is entirely subjective and very culturally-contextually dependent.
they also forget that the most common causes of DID in japanese children are different to those for american children. holy racism assuming that because something isn't just like america, that it must be wrong.
i've seen some crazy takes that mikoto's report implied that he just split an evil personality and went crazy one day because of (snootily) his job after having a perfect life before that, and it's just... no... that's not what it said. that's not what it said at all. and if that's what you're reading from it, maybe you should reassess your ability to read between the lines and be curious about other cultures and experiences which may give you further understanding for what experiences the writing may be trying to convey. maybe you should also be a little kinder, if not to the writers, to the people that find meaning in the character that you're mad about (just because he didn't fit your headcanon-expectations or personal fetish for american concepts around plural systems). but i digress.
i think mikoto was good :) some aspects were a little awkward, and he's not the combo-kill-as-suicide that would have been so fucking awesome... but he has a lot of really good nuggets, and he hits hard for me and a lot of my friends, and his interactive-writing-as-social-experiment has a lot of potential for literary and social analysis that i've already written uhm. a lot about. i will make a gang for those of us that think mikoto and his t3 was a good ride. and we will hold hands and stuff. spin
re: mikoto and the idea of mental illness, i think it's really important to notice that explicitly, in the text, it wasn't that he 'had' a mental illness, which caused him to commit a crime. it's that he commit a crime, and after the fact, recieved a psychiatric diagnosis, which marked him and his behaviour as mentally ill, to be judged as such.
if mikoto hadn't had his violent outbursts, and hadn't killed people – if he'd died by overwork – he would not have been considered mentally ill. his livelong emotional suppression, questionable self-esteem and substance abuse, and total disconnection from sides of himself that are shameful? they would not have been pathological, they would have been personality traits that had helped him serve and function, at the end of the day, as a model citizen.
if mikoto had had his violent outbursts and/or killed people, but never recieved a psychiatric diagnosis afterwards through milgram or otherwise, he also would not have been considered mentally ill [read: habouring some sort of disease that warps his mind and behaviour]. his violent outbursts, dissociative amnesia, independent streams of consciousness, and every other surrounding personality trait, would have been chalked up to his acute circumstances (including 100+ days of sleep deprivation, social isolation, and prolonged substance abuse) and general flawed and unfortunate character.
because at the end of the day, mental illness is not an intrinsic characteristic and it is not a neutral label. it is, historically, a way of labelling the root cause of criminal and dangerous and dysfunctional behaviour in inner irrationality, as opposed to external social circumstance. it is a label often given to criminals and antisocials, specifically to denote that they are criminals and antisocials by nature, so that wider society is not held accountable for the people (vulnerable by circumstance, by neurodiverse development, or both) that they abuse and then fail to support.
nothing about his character was mentally ill, up until the moment he commit a crime, which then checked off the final criterion on near every psychiatric diagnosis, that would read: 'above listed symptoms [traits] causes occupational and/or social dysfunction'.
milgram analysis: mikoto's DID crash course (for dummies)
or: please god stop saying he has a murderer alter please god stop saying he's a bad or unrealistic portrayal of DID.
will be referring to milgram-en's (John Doe, Neoplasm, t2 interrogation, t3 voice lines) translations. thank you for your work!
note on names: for the purposes of this post:
mikoto refers to the overall human being. this includes when i am speaking about him as a collective, and when speaking about him generically (when i don't know or care 'which' alter did what act).
'john' refers exclusively to the mikoto that appears in Neoplasm and is named 'john' by es for convenience. i will not assume any other 'not-normal-mikoto' alters are necessarily 'john'. you will see why.
when referring to any other specific parts of mikoto (eg. his normative identities, other versions of him we see) i will clarify which ones i mean within the sentence by describing them.
introduction
the amount of 'jokes' i've scrolled through on twitter lately about him being bad rep or having one good personality and one evil personality has officially made me lose my marbles.
my girlfriend pointed out that tbf, that sort of impression about how his character is written makes sense if you haven't read the text very deeply. not everyone has spent almost a year picking apart every word this man has said.
so i'm doing the work reading and i'm going to personally spoonfeed the relevant bits of the text to people. now nobody has any excuse.
i will try to keep every section as brief as possible, but please know that every section has a lot more evidence and reasoning behind it. please feel free to ask me about them or see my other (significantly longer) essays for further evidence and reasoning.
psuedo-essay starts now.
1. 'John' didn't commit the murders.
every time 'john' confesses to the murders, he makes a point to always, immediately, make sure that this confession means that mikoto will be forgiven/considered innocent, as if he has an ulterior goal and preoccupation with keeping mikoto's identity 'clean'.
his account of the murders is incredibly vague and emotionally detached (compared to 'normative-John Doe-mikoto' who panics and dissociates when pressed on the matter, and to his response in Interrogation 2 Q.10 where he exhibits distress and is unable to answer the question on if he feels sorry for his victims). it honestly seems like he doesn't have much connection to the memory at all.
and 'john' says himself in his own words that his reason for existence is to protect himself, and that eventually he will "take it all - bear it all, everything and anything, and [] be rid of it". he also demonstrates a striking amount of self-destructive ideation and poor self esteem.
to me, all this is indicative that 'john' is a part of mikoto that exists to bear the guilt of their murderous acts (and the stigma of being labelled a murderer); he is not a part that exists to perpetrate murder. he protects mikoto by 'owning' the unacceptable acts and elements of identity, isolating them within himself, and then planning/wanting to vanish it with him, somehow.
obviously, because of this, he wants es, the audience, and he himself to believe that 'john' — 'not-mikoto-(trust)' — perpetrated the murders, and that that means mikoto didn't do anything bad. but because we are smart we see through his dissociative coping mechanism.
mikoto murdered people; mikoto is being labelled a murderer. and although he has a psychological scapegoat that he cannot recognise as himself to help himself cope with that fact, he ultimately cannot escape that reality.
when mikoto is lobotomised and loses the part of himself that es calls 'john', the guilt and reality of his situation remains. all that is removed from mikoto in the lobotomy is his ability to separate himself from this act and cope by believing it was somebody else.
almost as if the purpose of 'john' was to act as a dissociated part that bears his guilt so mikoto (who cannot cope with this reality) can protect himself from confronting it.
2. Mikoto is mask upon mask, and 'John' is the model prisoner.
milgram.jp/character/mikoto (Profile):
常識人なりに常に状況に対して順応しようとしている。
tl: "A sensible* person who is always trying to [adapt/conform/acclimate/accomodate] to whatever the situation is."
By "sensible", it means acting in accordance with prudence and propriety with the mores. (@milgram-en)
mikoto is described on the milgram.jp website as a person who is always adapting to the situation at hand.
we can see this firsthand in his normative-identity-self that we meet in t1, who insists on what a standard everyday worker he is. in Double and Undercover and his interros we see how much he values his work and puts up with his abusive work environment, and how much he neglects himself to prioritise and bear it.
i find it practically textual that a major element of his identity is how he dissociates to allow himself to 'become' the role his environment expects of him, to survive these abusive environments.
by Neoplasm, mikoto's demeanour has adapted from his work-self to a 'prisoner-self', and he dissociates (through 'john') to 'become' the role MILGRAM expects of him.
in John Doe mikoto and es could not negotiate because mikoto could not accept any of this was real and insisted he was a regular guy.
in Neoplasm, 'john' is able to negotiate at length, making the warden's job easier and less frustrating. he accepts that MILGRAM is happening, he accepts that he is a murderer, and he even acts the part of a rough and aggressive prisoner without having it cause es any problems.
'john', on the surface, acts exactly as you'd expect an aggressive alter who perpetrated crimes to act, because that's exactly what es and the audience want him to be.
and just like in his life so far, by acting this part, he even gets on the right track for surviving this new abusive environment (T2 inno verdict).
3. Mikoto demonstrates very realistic dissociation from his absolutely justifiable anger.
when asked on if he'd ever even wanted to kill someone in the T2 interrogation, he denies it, uncertainly and disconnectedly. his handwriting shows visible distress and the beginnings of severe dissociation setting in. this claim that he'd never had such thoughts is also contradicted by him in Neoplasm, as 'john' says normative-mikoto "wished for a being that could destroy everything".
therefore it is pretty clear that despite having the capacity for violence and wishing for violence, mikoto cannot psychologically bear that coming from himself, and so whenever it comes up he either flat out denies its existence or attributes it to an 'other'.
he very obviously demonstrates dissociation from the fact that he killed people or has the capacity for such violent acts, because this reality is not one he can face or confront, because of the immense anguish it causes him.
in John Doe es persistently prods at his dissociation from his violent acts and thoughts and labels mikoto a murderer, despite mikoto begging for them to stop. es essentially takes a sledgehammer to mikoto's dissociation that has kept him stable all his life, and refuses to let up despite mikoto's begging and obvious immense distress.
mikoto's crashout is absolutely justifiable here. it's simply deeply unlucky that mikoto exists in a MILGRAM loophole and is therefore successful in connecting his attack, so this instance sticks out to everyone as a show of extreme violence.
(i don't think anybody thinks fuuta, who attacks es right at the start of his interrogation is volatile and violent, and yet mikoto is often labelled this way for reacting to relentless abuse.)
another element of his self that mikoto is clearly dissociated from is his anger. he cannot recall ever becoming angry and finds it an unacceptable way to be. hence the part of himself that does hold anger and is the one that explodes at es, is dissociated.
he didn't 'switch' into some fundamentally evil violent alter and start beating es for no reason.
he (completely understandably) cracked and lashed out under a relentless abusive assault, while also being unable to identify with lashing out or the idea of having angry emotions. hence, his demeanour changes for the period he is angry, and he forgets this understandable reaction after it happens.
this is literally just what DID is.
4. Mikoto demonstrates many more dissociative symptoms beyond alters. He also has more than two alters.
mikoto's writing evokes dissociative symptoms such as dereality (the feeling the world is unreal or dream-like), the feeling that you are watching yourself act without your own control, and the feeling that you have done things without being conscious of them, through his sleepwalking/dreaming imagery. these are common and significant dissociative symptoms found in disorders such as DID.
(i wrote this section in the miraheze wiki. i'm just not arsed to copy and paste it.)
he also demonstrates identity confusion and alteration outside of being a binary.
mikoto uses at least six distinct personal pronouns that are often intentionally alternated. most famously mikoto alternates katakana ore and kanji boku in Neoplasm (when talking about him ('john') vs 'normative-mikoto'), but mikoto also alternates personal pronouns in MeMe, wherein katakana boku and kanji boku are used as object and subject in a sentence respectively (ボクが僕を).
the mikoto who uses kanji boku in John Doe and the mikoto that uses kanji boku in Neoplasm also have distinct linguistic profiles and demeanours (see: milgram-en's commentary in how his boku pronouns are pronounced in their Neoplasm translation).
so pronouns are not the end-all for denoting which active part he is in; his identity and demeanour is persistently nebulous, inconsistent, and confused.
in mikoto's trial 2 interrogation alone mikoto also demonstrates at least five distinct handwriting styles.
the way the 'other' mikotos are drawn between MeMe and Double are markedly different. the ore mikoto in John Doe and 'john' use different personal pronouns (kanji ore and katakana ore respectively), while the ore personal pronoun in Double is back to kanji ore again.
and, literally anyone who has tried to analyse his MVs and definitively point out which shots are mikoto and which are 'john' can tell you that it is practically impossible.
mikoto isn't only two distinct parts, as much as we would like to assume. instead he has a lot of grey area, a lot of overlap, and is a character with a lot of undefined dissociated states.
5. Mikoto's DID label and the model of being multiple is coercively applied to him.
mikoto, coming into MILGRAM, does not consider himself to have DID. it is implied he does not know very much about DID even after he is labelled with it, and generally seems to sympathise with the notion of DID being a lousy excuse for murder.
however, after kotoko, es, jackalope, and the audience concede with his armchair DID diagnosis, and after MILGRAM ensures a main talking point between T1 and T2 is if having DID should let him get off for murder (by having kotoko suggest this angle), in T2, parts of mikoto begin to engage with the idea that he has multiple selves, and the argument that it was an alter that did it.
even after he has been labelled and begins to acknowledge he has different selves however, he doesn't seem to consider himself multiple entities with different names, like es (and the audience) expect him to. he (unenthusiastically) lets es provide him a distinguishing name for convenience, but he only identifies himself with this name once, at the very end of the voice drama and desperate to get through to them. he otherwise kind of ignores it.
a large part of how mikoto understands and presents his DID is directly informed by what people have told him about him, what they suggest he should be like, and how he knows they want to think about him. parts of it are also entirely constructed by the audience and es, as they mold him into a more stereotyped DID presentation that is digestible to them.
outside of MILGRAM's coercion, and within the less obvious parts of his writing, mikoto's DID is significantly more hidden, realistic, and nuanced. but under the audience's speculation and expectations he is shaped and plays into into what they expect him to be.
which is entirely in line with his vulnerable, highly adaptive, and socially conscious character.
conclusion
please be mindful when analysing characters like mikoto that you don't immediately assume they have bad, stereotyped writing just because they act in a way you don't understand.
when you pick apart mikoto's influences, his contexts, and look at his actions beyond the surface level, a very understandable and traumatised person emerges. just because many don't look beyond a surface level does not make his character illogical, volatile, or offensively written.
please engage with mentally ill characters respectfully and always examine your biases as you go.
milgram analysis: how mikoto introjects and conforms himself to social misconceptions around DID
analysing mikoto's character, how Milgram frames DID to characters and audience, and following how mikoto's sense of self and presentation develops in response to Milgram and the DID label.
(google docs ver for ease of reading)
will be referring to milgram-en's (John Doe, Neoplasm, interrogation) and Maristelina's (timeline) translations. thank you for your work!
note on content: i am die-hard autistic about DID representation.
as of writing this essay, i've already written two long analytical essays criticising mikoto's reception, and sharing my (strong) opinions on how i believe his DID functions.
while it's not necessary to have read my previous essays to understand this one, if you would like to understand my take on him in more depth, or just read more of my criticism around DID representation, you can find links to them here on my website!
note on names: for the purposes of this post:
mikoto refers to the person/system, all parts included
'mikoto' refers to any normative part of mikoto, when intentionally distinguished (ie. when the idea of mikoto having a 'normal' self is evoked and spoken of in opposition to an 'other' self)
mikoto (俺) refers to the 'othered' mikoto that appears in the John Doe (Trial 1) voice drama and attacks es. it also refers to the 'othered' mikoto from the timeline conversations, as that is the pronoun used, although these are not necessarily 'the same alter'.
mikoto (オレ) refers to the 'othered' mikoto that appears in the Neoplasm (Trial 2) voice drama and claims to be the alter who commit murder.
please note that i use words such as 'unacceptable' 'intolerable' etc. a lot in my mikoto analyses. please note i don't use these words in an 'objective' or judgemental way. i will always mean it first and foremost that whatever i am referring to 'cannot be accepted/tolerated by mikoto/the world he comes from'.
i'm working with translations and 09 is a complicated character, so please forgive any slip ups!
thank you for reading.
introduction: why do social misconceptions matter?
in my experience, a lot of discussions about mikoto are dominated by the fact that he has DID.
more specifically, i find that a lot of discussions around mikoto are dominated by the impression that his dissociative disorder indicates that 'plurality' or 'systemhood' is his inherent state of being. i find many people believe that having DID makes you 'a system' of discrete parts / alters / personalities, while others who do not suffer from DID, are not. therefore, the reveal of mikoto's DID is the reveal that mikoto is not one identity, but instead a 'system' of multiple alters that are yet to be defined and discovered.
this way of understanding mikoto leads many to interpret es', jackalope's, and kotoko's labelling of mikoto with DID as a generally neutral act — or even a positive one.
while mikoto, for the most part, is not aware of his DID, and being forced to be aware of his symptoms may be destabilising, because it is a 'fact' he has DID, this label being applied to him would seem to ultimately be an act that brings us closer to understanding mikoto and the truth that lies within him. it would seem that by reaching this label, adapting how we see him according to it, and subsequently communicating with mikoto's alters as individuals, all es does through their labelling of mikoto with DID is 'uncover' a 'truth' about mikoto and act accordingly, as one should.
in my opinion, having preconceptions about how one's self operates and would benefit from being treated, just because their symptoms correspond to a diagnostic label, is misguided and dehumanising to the mentally ill. more specifically to mikoto, i think these preconceptions have completely overridden any potential discussion about his themes, character influences, and the commentary on power dynamics, toxic social expectations, and coercive self-identification that Milgram provides.
mikoto is not just a character that suffers from the symptoms of DID. mikoto is, also, a highly socially conscious, adaptable, and vulnerable character, that is an expert at gleaning the expectations placed on him by those in power and authority, and conforming to them, to spare himself from scrutiny and abuse.
i believe mikoto's relationship to the label of DID and his 'systemhood' is less so about indicating his inherent state of being, and moreso a tool he adopts due to the social position he is placed in during Milgram, that he uses for his survival, and introjects to protect his self-image.
or: i believe mikoto actively responds to the label of DID as it is applied to him, gleans the social expectations of the label, and acts accordingly, introjecting a 'multiple' way of seeing his self as a way to make sense of his inner turmoil, and also plays the cards he is dealt socially, taking advantage of the audience's preconceptions around those with DID to help him survive the institution of Milgram and escape its torture and punishment for the murders he commit.
enjoy the read. i have a lot to cover.
main body 1: culture and conformity (quick section)
let's first put him into context.
being a person that suffers from a mental illness changes how you engage with the world.
not does being mentally ill mean you are considered to be atypical in how you view and interact with the world, with that difference causing impaired functioning and disruption to your health, but being mentally ill also impacts how others and wider society treat and value you, and subsequently how you treat, see, and value yourself.
in many societies, including japanese, having mental illness is a source of shame. because being considered mentally ill - having impaired functioning - involves the inability to fulfil an expected societal role or conform to societal and social expectations, being labelled as and functionally mentally ill often reaps the consequence of being unable to fit into society: being ostracised, being deemed an 'other', a worthless human, and/or a threat.
under the threat of ostracisation from their societies, and in the avoidance of shame, many people, such as mikoto, value their social roles, and have strong ideas about how they 'should' act and how they 'should' progress through life. should they struggle with their mental health, or otherwise feel that they are not acting or existing as they 'should', many will do anything in their power to maintain the illusion of functioning and normalcy, sacrificing their wellbeing in private and repressing any parts of themselves that they deem socially unacceptable.
mikoto, on practically every level in his life outside of Milgram, is not in a position to engage with the notion of being nonconformist. there is too much at stake for him, in his livelihood, his social position, his familial responsibilities, and his self-image.
it has been, and continues to be, vital for mikoto's survival that he stick to his established social role and conform to any social expectations placed on him, even if it causes him harm, because by aligning himself with the expectations of those with power over him, he can expect those in power and authority to favour (or overlook) him, helping him avoid scrutiny, shame, and the loss of everything he has sacrificed for.
this approach to navigating the world is ingrained in mikoto, and brings us the mikoto we encounter in Milgram.
main body 2: mikoto and social expectations
milgram.jp/character/mikoto (Profile):
常識人なりに常に状況に対して順応しようとしている。
tl: "A sensible* person who is always trying to [adapt/conform/acclimate/accomodate] to whatever the situation is."
By "sensible", it means acting in accordance with prudence and propriety with the mores. (@milgram-en)
mikoto is first introduced to us by emphasising how 'normal', average, and "sensible*" he is, and the fact he is a man that is "always trying to [adapt/conform/etc.]" to the situation at hand, conveying how attuned and aligned he is to social expectations. he also describes himself along these lines, emphasising his desire to be seen as a conformist and socially acceptable individual.
outside of the impression of normalcy he intentionally gives us, it is also likely that mikoto genuinely sees himself in this way, due to his own avoidance and a psychological need to protect his sense of self. (I speak in this essay about mikoto's relationship to shame.)
mikoto's desire to be seen and see himself as socially acceptable extends to a pathological degree; he displays a severe disconnect from unacceptable parts of his identity (such as his ever being angry before) that instead manifest in his dissociative parts,
he appears to / acts as if he has have no memory of his murder, and violent outbursts,
my friend pointed out that the dream imagery in MeMe and Double may be suggestive of his derealisation (it may imply he does have memory of his murders, but it feel so unreal and foreign to him that he can only feel that it must have been a bad dream he had),
and when pushed on the matter that he may be a murderer and have just forgotten, he has a panic attack, and his normative parts are forced to switch out and disengage, ensuring his dissociation from everything unacceptable about him, including the fact that he is a murderer, remains intact.
these traits mikoto has early on in Milgram are indicative of the person he has developed to be as a result of his upbringing and sociocultural influences. his social expectations outside of Milgram, to name a few, are to be operational, obedient to authority, and to conform. he cannot be, and therefore 'is not', strange, abrasive, mentally ill, or a murderer.
however, Milgram itself is a society in a sense, with its own social expectations, norms, and statuses. in John Doe, mikoto's insistence on his normalcy is rejected, due to being incongruent with the reality of Milgram, that denotes that he is a murderer. es attempts to force mikoto to acknowledge the reality of Milgram, and although he shuts down, dissociates, and ends up physically retaliating to es’ attack, mikoto's resistance to the label of murderer is a losing battle, and he knows it.
milgram.jp/character/mikoto (Profile):
夜中になってもミコトの監獄からは物音がするため、いつ寝ているのかがわからないと囚人の間で話題。
tl: "There are noises coming from Mikoto's prison even in the middle of the night, and the prisoners say they have no idea when he is asleep."
moreover, mikoto is attuned to the rising realisation that something is not right, and that others are becoming concerned about and afraid of him.
since the negative reputation mikoto gains in Milgram amongst his fellow prisoners would seem to be about the seemingly aggressive actions of his other parts (such as breaking things in his room while having meltdowns, defending himself against kotoko, and being judged unforgiven in Trial 1 following his (俺) violent outburst), mikoto likely feels he is not able to smooth this negative reputation over with his typical normative and friendly demeanours alone, and likely feels very out of control of his circumstances, reputation, and self overall.
all of these indicate to mikoto that he is in a new, strange place, removed from his ordinary life, with a new authority (the word of the warden) to conform and appeal to, lest he ostracised, punished, scrutinised, and have his sense of self shattered.
and interestingly, while he persists in being unable to integrate with his sense of self the idea that he is a murderer or commit violent acts, at the very end of John Doe he is bestowed a diagnostic label, that is then proposed to and adopted by Milgram's figure of authority. this label he finds applied to him is one that carries a preconceived notion around his personhood, and may just free him from having to shatter his forced-normal view of himself in light of his murders and acts he cannot explain, and instead allow him to blame everything unexplainable about him on an ‘other’ within himself.
main body 3: mikoto and the label of DID
at the end of John Doe, and following mikoto's (俺) violent outburst at es' prodding, kotoko armchair diagnoses mikoto with DID.
(at the beginning of Trial 2, Milgram (through jackalope) would seem to have confirmed this to be an accurate assessment, but in my opinion that's neither here nor there; just because he 'has' a disorder, does not make him an expert in it, necessarily honest about his symptoms, or immune to playing up his presentation to fit how people expect him to act or because of outside influences that coerce how he conceptualises himself in light of the label.)
when understanding what this act of labelling could mean to him, it's important to establish that, up to the beginning of Neoplasm, mikoto himself seems to a) not be aware that this is a condition he suffers from, and b) only really have a surface level knowledge of what DID is. he asks es about basic functions of and theory around the condition, and even confesses that in es' shoes, he would have assumed someone claiming to have DID was a liar trying to dodge responsibility.
that is to say, from the moment he realises this is a label being applied to him, the only real information he has about what this label means and what his social position is now is lifted directly from what es tells him, and what we, as the audience (that he hears as 'voices' between Trial 1 and 2) apply to him. which is great for me. what a controlled environment to analyse.
in my opinion, the earliest point that mikoto may have realised the DID label / model was being applied to him, is at the end of John Doe. even implicitly, es introduces to mikoto the concept of there being 'another him' or some 'outside' force within him.
even earlier than that, kotoko very powerfully controls the audience's eventual discourse around how we should be thinking about him in light of the diagnosis. by directly tying the label of DID she applies to him to an abstracted debate about culpability in patients with DID, the status of 'person with DID' mikoto gains fundamentally becomes a question of if he should be 'let off' for his actions because of it. therefore, Milgram ensures that a leading debate when it comes to mikoto and his diagnosis is the possibility of being forgiven because it was not 'actually him' that commit those acts.
(i'm not sure where to fit this, but i do want to comment on the violence of applying this stigmatised diagnosis to him so carelessly and without his consent, and especially encouraging es to see him accordingly as a 'case' of DID ('real multiple personality disorder patient'), thus dehumanising him by transforming him into an abstract thought experiment. i personally think it's abusive and prejudiced to act like his personhood and manner of existing is for an authority to 'other' and define; despite his dissociation, mikoto does not express a desire to be seen as multiple alters until it becomes strategically useful, and i genuinely believe that applying the label of DID, and thus the model of 'systemhood'/'multiplicity' onto him, without his consent, is abusive and prejudiced. i believe any person's decision to see and express themselves as a 'system' of multiple selves must be done on their own accord and for their own benefit, and not because they are pathologised and somehow deemed inherently 'different' as a human being. ok, i just wanted to say this.)
all this to say, between Trial 1 and Trial 2, at the same time that mikoto is coping with and trying to make sense of this traumatic and strange situation, feeling out of control of his circumstances, reputation, and self, he is persistently hearing the audience discuss the notion that there could be 'another him' responsible for all his intolerable acts, behaviours, and personality traits, as well as the idea that this 'other him' is also 'not him', and that it is a possibility they may not hold mikoto responsible for the actions and existence of the 'other him'.
it has been, and continues to be, vital for mikoto's survival that he [...] conform to any social expectations placed on him, even if it causes him harm, because by aligning himself with the expectations of those with power over him, he can expect those in power and authority to favour (or overlook) him, helping him avoid scrutiny, shame, and the loss of everything he has sacrificed for.
as i've established, mikoto has a narrowed self-image; he is avoidant to acknowledging distress and possesses a psychological need to protect his sense of self and appear normative, functional, and socially acceptable, which he does by disowning parts of himself and dissociating.
not only is it helpful for him to play the cards he's dealt and adapt to the position he has found himself in to curry the favour of those in power (because frankly, weakly and confusedly resisting es' assertions of his identity as a murderer due to his normative parts' narrowed sense of self is draining and triggering to him, and getting him nowhere in terms of Milgram), but i cannot emphasise enough how subconsciously appealing of an explanation it must be to him, to imagine that everything he has psychologically disowned actually 'isn't him', and therefore an aspect of his self he does not have to face responsibility or consequences for.
that is to say, although he truly suffers from DID and has truly dissociated from parts of his self so much that he cannot and refuses to recognise them as himself, because kotoko evokes the common and 'othering' misconception that alters are discrete and autonomous (and opens the debate about the possibility of not holding one responsible for the acts of the other), the audience's debate encourages mikoto to adopt the belief, outlook, and strategy that his alters are 'different people', distinct from him, and solely responsible for the acts mikoto has dissociated himself from.
main body 4: introjected stigma and self-conceptualisation
while i think on a lot of levels, mikoto conforms to the DID status as a tool for his Trial 2 interrogation, it is still worth noting that as a vulnerable person with a socially reliant sense of self, mikoto is vulnerable to introjecting stigma and negative conceptions around the mentally ill, and applying them to himself, which negatively impacts on his self-image.
date: August 5th, 2024 (Kazui's Birthday)
even without es' authority to perform a certain identity towards and appeal to, as Milgram progresses, mikoto appears to slowly grow to worry about himself and genuinely start to believe he is unpredictable and violent, thus seeking to isolate himself from others. he also demonstrates the assumption that kazui is in touch with the social consensus that there is something scary or strange about mikoto, and expects kazui to treat him and think about him accordingly.
AMANE: ...Who are you?
How intriguing.
Are you saying you are not Mikoto Kayano?
MIKOTO: Ha- You're asking who am "I"?
That's what "I" wanna know.
Whoops, don't come any closer.
I'm in a rebellious phase and there's no guarantee I won't kill you, brat [kid] or not.
Just leave quietly.
date: October 6th, 2024 (Mikoto's Birthday) (source)
mikoto, later, also directly engages with the social consensus that there is something strange and scary about him. during his birthday interaction, mikoto (俺, it would seem, or at the least an 'other mikoto' that uses this personal pronoun, given that's what's written) actively portrays himself to amane as 'not mikoto' — a violent and unpredictable undefined existence, that people should stay away from, and reinforcing his established negative social perception.
this is in line with mikoto's growing internalised belief that, due to his (or, in having) mental illness, he is violent and unpredictable.
as ore (俺)/'not mikoto' he is also able to engage directly with this introjected belief, and actively portray himself according to how he believes others see him, to reinforce that status for his goals. for this circumstance, his goal appears to be - again - to isolate himself, because he believes that there is something wrong with him, and believes that he may become violent for no reason, something he does not want to have happen. thus he threatens amane, reminding her of his poor reputation, and 'protects' her from himself.
(note: i am calling his belief that 'he is volatile' an introjected belief, and not entertaining the idea that he is just being honest about his own violent impulses, because despite his negative reputation, mikoto (regardless of self-state) has never demonstrated that he is someone who becomes violent 'for no reason'. in my opinion, by warning amane to stay away for her own safety, he demonstrates that he does not want to hurt her. moreover, the only fights he has engaged with were explicitly in self-defense: kotoko in physical self-defense (although is unaware of this context and attributes it to sleepwalking, furthering his belief he gets into violent situations without his control and unprovoked), and es in psychological self-defense, only after being pushed far further beyond his mental limits than any other prisoner.)
another goal in this interaction with amane could also be, in my opinion, the desire to protect himself through self-isolation. because mikoto is vulnerable to social scrutiny and shame, and feels as if he can't control his acts or how he is seen, it would make sense that he therefore strives not to be seen by or interact with anybody, allowing him to maintain at least some amount of control over his identity and the way he is seen. thus, just like his interaction with kazui, mikoto (俺) plays the cards he has been dealt to his advantage, and reminds others of his negative social perception, to secure a relative social safety in being isolated.
i also think it's worth commenting on the dimension of mikoto (俺) in this interaction being 'not mikoto', and the psychological and social advantages of playing into a sense of DID/multiplicity. i think a major aspect for how mikoto internalises the DID label and sense of an 'other mikoto', is because by cementing a 'not mikoto', it helps mikoto remove himself from himself, and apply (which i typically call scapegoating) his undesirable traits onto an 'other'.
when it comes to mikoto's (俺) warning to amane while he emulates the outcasted and rough social role he perceives as having, framing himself as 'not mikoto' allows him to act in the way he does to protect himself & others, without challenging his strong sense of what 'is' mikoto (ie. socially conscious, innocent of wrongdoing, conformist, sensitive). thus, mikoto (俺) does what he needs to do, and by psychologically removing his self from the act, protects his sense of self and preserves - at least to him - the illusion of normative 'mikoto'.
moreover, it is likely his (俺) sense of being 'not mikoto' is also a genuine dissociative feeling he has. because 'mikoto' is a narrowed identity that has disowned the majority of his own personality and humanity, and the traits and manners of existing contained in the 'other mikotos' are disallowed from being 'mikoto', it does beg the question to every other part of him of who they 'are'.
in my experience, drawing attention to (or god forbid, reinforcing) identity alteration/confusion makes it worse. therefore, i can believe that while in previous dissociative episodes mikoto has similarly felt 'altered' and 'not like himself', without the social pressure of Milgram and a preoccupation with the notion of having other selves (instead being preoccupied with his conformist identity and life responsibilities), he did not dwell on it, and quickly lost connection entirely with the instance in which he felt strange (either through estrangement and brushing it off, or forgetting it altogether).
in contrast, because in Milgram, DID and mikoto's strangeness is made to be at the forefront of his mind, the dysphoria inducing differences between what he thinks 'he' is like and what he is actually like become amplified. mikoto has likely become more alert to his idea of his 'self' and his manners of existing, leading him to more easily feel strange and 'out-of-character' for minor ways in which he does not conform to his narrowed sense of self, which leads his ostracised parts to properly notice and be affected by their exclusion from mikoto's accepted sense of self. thus, they perceive themselves — and begin expressing themselves — as unexplainable, disowned, existences.
date: October 6th, 2023 (Mikoto's Birthday)
mikoto also directly confronts the idea that there is 'another him' during his 2023 birthday timeline conversation, and we even get to see two sides of him express the way they conceptualise themselves in opposition to one another.
i think this exchange really demonstrates how mikoto uses a sense of multiplicity to cope with his own shame and his fears around feeling out of control. by splitting the way he sees himself in two, mikoto can both blame 'himself' for his traumas and social ostracisation, expressing his internalised shame and self hatred, while also preserving 'himself' as an innocent victim and externalising his grief.
the beginning of this interaction is, explicitly, because mikoto 'comes around' to the model of multiplicity people have forcibly applied to him. with it in mind, 'mikoto' makes sense of everything that has caused him grief and blames it on the 'other him'.
specifically:
1. 'mikoto' blames the 'other him' for ripping his clothes: specifically, he blames the 'other him' for ripping his straitjacket he wears into t2 that, we can infer from the shreds, had incredibly long sleeves and bodice, and was likely used to restrict his movement and possibly restrain him.
therefore, while 'mikoto' blames the 'other him' for for the frightening state of his clothes, in context, mikoto's act to tear his clothes was one of resisting oppression. it was probably also an act of expressing more than a little rage at the injustice mikoto is facing in being incarcerated and abused.
'mikoto' does not acknowledge or sympathise with this context, and whether 'mikoto' is psychologically aware of this context to the 'other his' actions is unclear. it is possible his distress about his ripped clothes, and why he lashes out at the 'other him' for doing that, is because he is so dissociated that he is genuinely unaware of why he did this, and is frightened by the unexplainable and feeling out of control.
i think it's also possible that even if mikoto was aware of why he ripped up his straitjacket, he would not have sympathised with his past decision, and would still have verbally abused himself for acting out of line. because ripping the straitjacket is an act of resisting oppression — not conforming to his social position and submitting to authority — 'mikoto' likely finds it an unacceptable and dysphoric act. moreover, because ripping the straitjacket is more than likely an expression of rage, an emotion 'mikoto' does not allow him to express as 'himself' (and likely feels he has no experience with, as 'himself'), this goes doubly.
2. 'mikoto' also blames the 'other him' for scaring the others in the prison. i will assume this is referring to the loud noises he makes at night, the destruction of his property he does when angry, and the fight he gets into with kotoko.
(this timeline conversation takes place before the previous two i analysed, so i'll assume he hasn't began performing his 'othered' identity yet, in frightening others to protect them/himself. although, i have already covered why i believe he does this, and it's hardly malicious, so it wouldn't effect things either way.)
while it's understandable why mikoto and his fellow prisoners find mikoto's nightly crash-outs to be extreme, it's worth bearing in mind that not only is he having his rights abused, in a traumatic and triggering situation, and the only property he destroys is his own and in his own room, with no risk of anyone being caught in the cross-fire, mikoto does not have — and has never had — any healthy coping mechanisms for his anger outside of repression.
it is likely mikoto has no idea how to deal with overwhelming emotions, which not only makes them feel bigger and compound over his lifetime (as all he does is repress them, put them into a box for later, and act as if they do not exist), but also means that any time he does express them, it's not exactly in socially acceptable ways.
regarding his fight with kotoko, she explicitly attacks him first, and it seems it was only because he was 'ready' that he was able to hold his own and not be knocked unconscious (or worse, if you look at how mahiru ended up at her hands) like he was in John Doe. i think it's fair to say that any negative reputation mikoto receives for this scuffle is unfair, as is blaming an 'other mikoto' for 'scaring people' through it.
(it's also possible mikoto only perceives that people are scared of him because of his scuffle with kotoko, because he is projecting his own anxiety. it's entirely possible people are only scared of him because of the strange noises coming from his room, and his increasingly haggard demeanours, odd behaviour, self-isolation, and the fact they knew kotoko made an attempt on their life simply worries them, in a way they do not know how to approach. regardless of the reality though, he thinks others are scared of him, and punishes himself accordingly.)
thus, once again, 'mikoto' finds his — absolutely understandable, and often justifiable — expressions of anger and engagement in violence either unexplainable and frightening, or dysphoric and unacceptable, leading him to lash out to the 'other him' that he dissociates from, and that he associates with these acts.
'mikoto' also blames himself and his expressions of unacceptable emotions and behaviour for the abuse he is currently suffering within Milgram ("it's your fault things have become like this"). this is consistent with how mikoto has been conditioned throughout his life through his culture, to perceive any punishment, scrutiny, and inability to survive an unjust system as a flaw from within himself.
(this outlook also functions as a coping mechanism: by always finding the blame in himself, mikoto helps himself feel that he has control — believing that if he just does everything right, everything will turn out ok — saving him from the despair of acknowledging that social systems are often unfair, and pointlessly cruel.)
'mikoto' eventually receives a reply to his self-blame and verbal abuse after he begins to shout, with his 'other self' (who writes his personal pronoun as 俺 for this exchange) defending his actions (or the actions he identifies as having done) on the basis that he did it for 'mikoto'.
notably, mikoto (俺) never protests being blamed in itself, demonstrating that even in the parts of him that can stomach identifying with his deemed unacceptable acts and expressions, he universally lacks the self esteem to defend himself or consider it an injustice to be shamed. he also likely doesn't protest being blamed because the scapegoating of an 'other mikoto' is a source of stability for mikoto that allows normative 'mikoto' to be preserved, and thus is not a notion mikoto is willing to challenge; even if this had been a part that was willing to protest injustice, he cannot conceptualise doing so at normative 'mikoto's' expense, and also possibly cannot perceive injustice if it is at normative 'mikoto's' hands.
the interaction ends with 'mikoto' seeming to not hear mikoto's (俺) defense, and instead opting to stop thinking about this all. i personally read this as normative 'mikoto' being physically unable to process mikoto's (俺) response and dissociating very severely upon receiving one, demonstrating that normative 'mikoto', unlike his other selves, cannot directly behold his 'other selves' and parts, as they are so threatening to normative 'mikoto's' self-image and enforced illusion of normalcy that characterises this part of him. therefore, it is likely that the maximum extent to how normative 'mikoto' can engage with the notion of DID / having other selves at this point, is, at best, to engage with them as an abstract concept and 'other', for the sole purpose of psychologically scapegoating.
to conclude this section, i have demonstrated that:
as a result of the rising sense that something is 'not right' with him, social sensitivity to his negative reputation, and the concept introduced to mikoto of there being 'another him' who could be held uniquely responsible for perpetrating his unforgivable acts, mikoto begins to psychologically split himself apart. he finds that he can only tolerate the reality of his situation so far, and although he is 'aware' that others are afraid of him and that he has done certain frightening things, due to his narrowed normative self-image that he has cultivated to maintain his own acceptability and an illusion of control over himself, he finds himself drawn to the explanation of there being an 'other him'. from there, mikoto scapegoats all his intolerable acts and traits onto this unexplainable, abstract figure, who he feels — expressing his own intolerance towards himself — deserves to be shamed, blamed, and needs to stop doing the 'awful things' he does immediately.
in response to his new split self-perception and his preexisting complexes and weak sense of self, mikoto begins to consider himself an 'other mikoto' or 'not mikoto' whenever he finds himself in a self-state that acts or operates beyond his normative, tolerable, persona. as these newly mentally defined parts, he encourages his own psychological splitting and scapegoating, and comes to shoulder unique responsibility for his intolerable acts as his 'other selves', allowing him to maintain the security and purity of his normative persona, despite how Milgram persistently forces him to engage with an intolerable reality that would challenge it. due to natural differences between normative 'mikoto' and his 'beyond normative' self-states in what they can tolerate and engage with, mikoto (in his 'other' states) also finds himself interacting with his perceived negative social reputation, and occasionally leans into an 'othered' persona, portraying himself how he believes others see him (and how he has come to believe he 'is') — shameful, uncouth, and at risk of becoming dangerous, unprovoked — to protect himself, and others, from himself.
in this way, social stigma around mental illness, mikoto's poor relationship to himself, and the label of DID that Milgram introduces to him (the notion of there being an 'other him') drastically changes how mikoto conceptualises himself, and shapes to a massive extent how he comes to cope with Milgram — a new, traumatic and stressful society that he has found himself in.
main body 5: DID as a social tool
as established in section 3, the label of DID when applied to mikoto is fundamentally a thought experiment posed towards the audience about the culpability of persons with DID. as explored in section 4, due to the audience's suggestions and his own complexes, mikoto has begun psychologically dividing himself from the acceptable (innocent of wrongdoing) parts and unacceptable (associated with wrongdoing) parts.
while, as mentioned in section 4, normative 'mikoto' seems unable to directly behold his 'other selves', and can only briefly entertain the thought as an abstract concept before shutting down — mikoto's 'other selves', already on the exiles of his identity, have no such phobia of the intolerable or enforced normalcy to sustain. thus, in the pursuit of appealing to abusive authorities that dictate their treatment and survival, they can directly engage with, and negotiate according to, the model of DID and multiplicity that has been applied to them.
in Neoplasm, mikoto (オレ) engages directly with the notion of there being an 'other mikoto', in order to scapegoat this ‘other self’ for mikoto's crimes. this not only allows himself to protect himself psychologically, preserving the illusion of normalcy and innocence for normative 'mikoto', and encourages Milgram to cease attacking his sense of self (instead bringing all the heat to the 'other him'), but is also vital for making the most out of the model es has applied to them, and allows it to be framed it in a way that secures a forgiven verdict for himself, ensuring his physical safety and, hopefully, leading to his ultimate survival and freedom from Milgram.
in contrast to John Doe, wherein mikoto is psychologically removed from his normative state when put under immense emotional pressure, but never identifies himself as 'not mikoto', in Neoplasm, mikoto (オレ) makes a point to draw attention to his shift in his sense of self. he does this by responding to es' comment on ‘his’ ‘sudden appearance’ roughly, openly reacting to es as if he's only just laid eyes on them in a while, and immediately, suddenly, alluding to the events of the 'other mikoto' in John Doe.
all these choices communicate to es that, and reinforce their perception that, mikoto is no longer 'himself'.
after a short period of mikoto (オレ) expressing his change in personality and attitude from his typical demeanour, es attempts to adapt to the situation according to how one may engage with a 'case of DID', and makes attempts to identify ‘who’ this self ‘is’.
in light of common preconceptions around DID, es demonstrates the assumption that mikoto's alter would have a unique name and personhood (or at the least, expresses the desire to assign mikoto's alter a name, as to distinguish him from 'actual/normal mikoto').
mikoto (オレ) reacts with surprise and suspicion that es is taking this turn of events so easily, demonstrating a consciousness about his social standing and the absurdity of the situation he has found himself in, and attempts to gauge how much es actually believes what is going on. i find this to be a good and socially-conscious first move — it would be incredibly embarrassing and ineffective to continue if the warden was only entertaining what they thought was a blatant lie.
despite mikoto (オレ) making a direct reference to malingered DID and its infamy in cases where people fake the condition to try and escape responsibility for murder, es' response assures mikoto (オレ) that, because they have decided he is an 'authentic case' according to jackalope's judgement and the consensus of the audience, it has never crossed their mind that he may still use its social status, the model of multiplicity, or misconceptions around the condition to his advantage.
which is a — relatively speaking — decent place for mikoto to confirm he is in; he has just confirmed that whether or not he 'has' DID or has an 'other self' is not up for argument, and can be assured that this is indeed the view of his self and expectation for his behaviour that has been placed upon him, that he must work with. he can be assured he is acting ‘correctly’, and continues with this approach.
despite the fact that mikoto (オレ) expresses no desire to be named anything unique (having already dodged the question once), and immediately complains about the name he is given, refusing to affirm it, es insists on naming mikoto (オレ) 'john'.
in the act of giving mikoto (オレ) a distinct name, es draws a binary in mikoto, and creates the illusion of discrete personhood between mikoto's alters, borne from their, and the audiences', rudimentary misconceptions around DID. moreover, as my friends have pointed out, by assigning him a western name, typically reserved for animals and (in being derived from 'John Doe') things that are 'unknown', es cements the sense that mikoto (オレ) is an 'other' — whether that be not japanese (not aligned with their cultural values, ideals, and society), not human (but an animal, pet, or beast), or dubiously existing or definable at all. this, again, opposes mikoto (オレ) with his normative, conformist identity, reinforcing mikoto's dissociative ostracisation, and the sense, for the audience, that mikoto exists as a binary 'system'.
mikoto (オレ) is not pleased about this development initially, due to, presumably, not actually having a particularly distinct sense of self as an alter, and probably feeling pretty insulted by the name choice. however, es' decision here to personify 'john' and crystallise the sense that the 'other mikoto' is his own distinct being who contrasts mikoto, later becomes vital for mikoto's (オレ) negotiations, and is also crucial for crystallising mikoto's reception as a 'system'. so, thanks, es. this is a surprise tool that will help us later.
during the interrogation, the first time mikoto (オレ) draws a direct parallel between ‘himself’ and his normative self when musing to es about how frequently he has found himself in his 'other' states, being unable to exist in his normative selves due to the psychological damage of Milgram (that accuses him of murder, seeks to restrain him, and has him finding himself doing unacceptable acts, such as lashing out against injustice). that is to say, the first time mikoto (オレ) reinforces and appeals to the binary between 'himself' and his normative selves is in framing 'his' continued existence as a threat to 'mikoto's'.
in my opinion, this conveys a genuine anxiety mikoto has, albeit through the lens of the illusion of having a binary self. mikoto, defined as he is to his established position in the outside world, wants to be his normative selves; he wants to maintain a sense of normalcy and live a safe and socially acceptable life, and he feels ashamed and monstrous when he acts out of line from that. i find it likely that mikoto genuinely finds it distressing that he has so often not 'been' or felt 'right' since the unforgiven verdict, and is afraid he may never be able to act as ‘himself’ (as he understands it) again, if Milgram persists.
i also think this anxiety also speaks to how moldable he is by Milgram’s environment: under the pressures of Milgram, mikoto’s ‘new self’ he is adjusting to, that is dictated by Milgram’s expectations and labels (of murderer, volatile, prisoner), is naturally becoming a more dominant force as he adjusts to his new social position. therefore, it is not just that he is dissociating, and discovering ways he feels he is out of line with his normative sense of self, but under these new labels and pressures, he is finding himself to be fundamentally shaped and changed by Milgram into a new self, not unlike how he was by the outside world. i find it likely that mikoto is also afraid of losing himself in becoming a product of Milgram’s environment, and in turn becoming alienated and ostracised from his culture, upbringing, and life from before the events of Milgram.
after asking es about a basic function of DID — what causes a dissociative separation between self-states — mikoto (オレ) ponders on why he (オレ) exists and has been himself (オレ) so often, and alludes to 'mikoto's' distress at being persecuted for crimes he does not remember, rationalising that this is why his normative self has not felt conscious lately.
i feel that the way in which he expresses his relationship to his crimes ("the person in question...") draws attention to the unique selfhood of 'mikoto-who-does-not-remember', and conveys it at a distance. this both reinforces the idea that normative 'mikoto's' self has nothing to do with his murderous acts, and that this self is estranged from the mikoto that is speaking.
(according to my friend, the incredibly objective way he speaks here almost makes him sound like a defense lawyer (or other third party) representing his client. this tone and framing of his selves helps mikoto create the illusion that ore's (オレ) assessment of his normative self can be trusted — it's generally a lot more convincing to say somebody else didn't do it than that 'you' didn't do it — and discourages es from interrogating (attacking) his normative self any further, as he has a reliable, compliant, and well-spoken 'representative')
in light of ore's (オレ) compliance and confident, seemingly trustworthy assessments of his normative self, es seems prepared to take mikoto's words as the truth.
(as to why es takes this explanation at face value, i think it’s important to analyse es’ and mikoto’s relationship and dynamic thus far.)
(in John Doe, the bulk of es' struggles engaging with mikoto as the warden can be attributed to that fact that es, as an agent of Milgram and authority in this circumstance, is shaped to the belief that Milgram is 'just' and does not make mistakes; es trusts that Milgram would not have brought in mikoto had he not commit murder, and uses this belief as the basis of their interrogation. however, mikoto is unable to face this fact, and clings, in opposition to es, in his belief in his normative reality and sense of self. therefore, during the bulk of John Doe, mikoto stubbornly resists es' worldview, and es — with the exception of briefly entertaining him — stubbornly resists his. both parties find themselves unable to reconcile the facts that they respectively trust in, and find themselves at a standstill and conflict. this ultimately leads the interrogation to not particularly develop in any useful way, and ends with es injured, after mikoto physically retaliates after being pushed and abused too far.)
(however, if we are prepared to believe mikoto has different autonomous selves, this would seem to provide a new, seemingly logical answer as to why mikoto has found himself admitted to Milgram, that mikoto can — more or less — allow himself to engage with and mold himself to. through the explanation that it was another of mikoto's selves, Milgram was not strictly 'wrong' that mikoto had commit murder, Milgram's integrity is preserved, and es has no reason to object on a fundamental level to mikoto’s assertions.)
(also, from es' perspective, ore's (オレ) compliance in Neoplasm, fitting into the role of ‘model prisoner’ (in that he is rough, appears to act the part of a violent prisoner, but also never really lashes out and is cooperative for discussion), is a real breath of fresh air. not only does the split-personality explanation work for them ideologically, and it also helps es avoid the stubborn, uncooperative, normative ‘mikoto’ that refused to engage and lashed out. therefore, in Neoplasm, mikoto (オレ) entirely conforms himself to es’ wishes, preconceptions, and convenience, giving them little to no reason to object to his existence or assertions, and making the interrogation that much smoother.)
from the proposed reality that normative 'mikoto' had not commit the crime, es makes the assumption that it must have been 'john', the other self-state mikoto has that es has established for themselves in their mind. mikoto (オレ) agrees with this assumption when they query — notably, shockingly easily.
i find it makes a lot of sense that mikoto can make his 'confession' so matter-of-factly. as i've established, not only is mikoto at the moment playing the part of a violent prisoner and allowing himself to be defined by the labels coercively applied to him by those in authority, but the way the other dissociated mikotos conceptualise themselves are also largely defined by feeling like unexplainable, disowned existences that act as scapegoats and targets for shame and blame. therefore, there is not much emotional stake in this confession; mikoto, at best, feels removed from it entirely, and feels that he is blaming a mere concept, and at worst, feels he is blaming an unexplainable plague within himself, or a self that is a prisoner and ‘not himself’ (in a sense), that is used to — and likely 'deserves' — being blamed.
ultimately, through this 'confession', what mikoto provides to es is simply the 'fact' that he has been insisting on from the start. he even makes a point to reiterate himself.
"[this current existence, who is not what you call or judge as 'mikoto'] killed."
and "[my normative self, who you do call and judge as 'mikoto'] didn't do it."
mikoto’s assertions and fundamental beliefs about his normative self never really change. throughout both interrogations, despite the changing circumstances, he unwaveringly seeks to protect his normative reality and self against the pressures of Milgram and the crimes he commit that Milgram attempts to force him to confront. what he does change, however, is his social strategy and performance, that adapts as he gains a greater awareness of the position he is in and the expectations being placed on him, to appease those around him, satisfy their expectations, and avoid grief. therefore, when coming into Neoplasm, while he continues to advocate for his innocence, he does so not as stubborn, difficult, normative 'mikoto', who struggles to conform to the realities of Milgram, but instead from the perspective of a compliant, 'objective third party', who pitches an explanation for mikoto's circumstances that, largely, conforms to the warden's worldviews and beliefs.
in this way, mikoto adapts himself, and becomes and performs the perfect self suited for Milgram to secure his physical and psychological survival. mikoto conforms to everything: the expected and preferred behaviour (compliance, confession), the beliefs of the authorities around him (that Milgram is correct), and the assumptions of his personhood he finds applied on him (that he is volatile and aggressive, the rumours of DID and being multiple selves) and uses and conforms to them all to his advantage.
because by aligning himself with the expectations of those with power over him, he can expect those in power and authority to favour (or overlook) him, helping him avoid scrutiny, shame, and the loss of everything he has sacrificed for.
as he could expect — because he knows how the world works — by conforming and aligning himself with the expectations of those in authority, mikoto finally avoids the scrutiny and abuse Milgram has subjected him to, and finds himself believed for the first time.
es never questions mikoto's (オレ) 'confession', nor his weak and generic responses to being pressed for further details, nor really the logistics of a self-state alone committing murder. in fact, mikoto's (オレ) vague descriptions of his acts only seem to convince them further.
when es seems thoroughly convinced by the confession, mikoto (オレ) once again checks with where es is at with their ruling, allowing him to gauge his next course of action with his interrogation strategy. after learning that es believes the conventional approach to these situations would be capital punishment, mikoto panics (オレ).
(as per usual, this response is likely both because he (as a dissociated part of himself) genuinely feels mortified at the idea of his normative self being punished for things his normative self 'did not do' (despite the fact he only gets the impression he has an innocent, normative self because he has psychologically removed all his shameful acts from that mental construct), and because he would definitely rather not physically die or be punished as a human being — the ideal is that he is able to blame something that does not really exist or exists ‘outside’ of his normative self, to avoid being punished or forced to accept his intolerable acts as his whole self's.)
in response to es' unresponsiveness to the notion that normative 'mikoto' should be let off and go unpunished if it was 'only ore's (オレ) fault', mikoto (オレ) finds himself defending, and spinning sympathy for his normative self.
first he (オレ) claims his normative self was 'asleep' for his murders, emphasising his uninvolvement, but also vulnerability. when that doesn't work, he (オレ) shouts at es to empathise with 'mikoto's' position, drawing attention to how pitiful, alone, well-behaved, and sensitive mikoto is. he highlights how mikoto’s circumstances were all stacked against him, and how despite everything, he always sought to do everything right, to comply, and to act natural, but how it all just wasn’t possible.
the worst things mikoto (オレ) allows himself to associate with his normative self are the acts of wishing for a being that could stand up against his abuse, and of 'giving birth' to his 'other self'. even then, however, mikoto (オレ) emphasises that the birth of his 'other self' is not something he could have not done, and maintains that, regardless of his violent fantasies, 'he' never truly wanted, nor had control over, the perpetrated acts, outbursts, and expressions he attributes to ‘not-mikoto’.
i have no say on how far mikoto truly believes in 'his' uninvolvement and lack of control; i find all interpretations to be compelling in their own right. he may truly believe he didn't have any control over himself and that these were not his acts, due to how ostracised from himself and dissociated he feels. he may only emotionally believe it, as he cannot bear to imagine these were his acts and thus clings to this story he has conjured to reassure himself that these acts were not his own. he may also simply just want to believe it and have it be taken as truth, and presents it as such regardless of any doubts or conflicts in his mind, seeing as any dwelling on or expressions of ambiguity could be fatal in these circumstances.
nevertheless, it's a convenient reality to propose and protect himself with, and one that he does.
in response to es buckling down about the conventional legal approach to these matters (and bringing attention to the fact that human life was lost), mikoto (オレ) panics even further, and implores es to approach them as ‘themself’.
i find that by drawing attention to es' judgement as an individual, rather than an agent of law, mikoto (オレ) pushes them emotionally off-balance and distances them from their typical desire to be objective and ruthless as the warden, giving them an uncertainty they betray in the tone of their response. this plea also encourages es, in their emotionally vulnerable state, to approach him (or more specifically, the victimised 'mikoto'), in turn, as a person they've come to know and grown attached to, likely making them more sympathetic and prone to forgiveness to preserve 'mikoto's' wellbeing (consider how Milgram's audience generally buys the idea that mikoto is a helpless victim, and feel bad at the notion of not forgiving him, especially if that means that, as mikoto (オレ) alludes to earlier, normative 'mikoto' will vanish and only his 'other personality' will remain).
ultimately however, it's interesting to note that despite the fact that es is ultimately uncertain on any strong conclusion on if mikoto's account of events means mikoto should be forgiven (as this judgement is the audience's job), they are never seen to question — nor does Milgram encourage the audience to question — mikoto's binary, his claims that he was possessed by his other selves and unable to control himself, or his claims that his other selves are 'not him'.
this manner of approaching his crime — seeing him as a person who, somehow, operates fundamentally differently to others due to his diagnostic label — echoes the sentiment kotoko proposes when giving him the DID diagnosis in Trial 1. es even reiterates it, almost verbatim. however this time, because mikoto has been able to adapt to his circumstances, he has been able to use the Neoplasm interrogation to take control of, play up to, and reinforce the models applied to him as a prisoner and person labelled with DID to guide the audience's discourse around his crime and es’ view of him, in his favour this time.
by echoing es' own language and using their preconceptions against them — calling himself 'john' for the first time when concluding his pitch and strategy for forgiveness — mikoto aligns himself with es' stigmas and belief that mikoto (オレ) is a distinct entity from mikoto that must (and can) be defined, and reframes this to guide es' approach to judging, reinforcing the illusion that mikoto's acts were not perpetrated by himself.
i find it very compelling that mikoto's ultimate argument is to promise that if he is forgiven ore (オレ) will 'disappear', since i find that this argument echoes and manipulates how the insanity defense is constructed in certain parts of the world; he makes it out that he was not in control of himself and therefore cannot (or at least, should not) be held legally responsible or punished for his acts, but also that he does not have to be removed from society for being unable to be held responsible, because the mental illness that perpetrated those acts has been identified and is going to vanish imminently.
(this is another way mikoto's ‘binary’ is practically and psychologically useful. by framing himself as only having two personalities, he makes it seem that by 'disappearing' his scapegoat part, mikoto will only have one personality left, making him, seemingly, be 'normal' again, not only no longer associated with a crime or poor behaviour contained within the personality, but also longer be mentally ill or have multiple selves at all. this helps when it comes to the verdict — i'm sure some insane people saw ore (オレ) disappearing through magical lobotomy as a good thing and as his disorder and disruptive behaviour being 'cured' — and also helps mikoto cope with his identity, dissociating himself from everything he cannot tolerate, and labelling it as more-or-less outside forces that do not have to disrupt his sense of self.)
ultimately, mikoto, functionally, promises that from now on, he will always be in control like anyone else, and that he will now be normal, functional, and socially acceptable, like he 'always has been', and always strives to be, unable, in his survival-driven state, to acknowledge or accept the extent of his self beyond his normative identity constructs, nor the damage that his intolerance towards himself has had on his mental health.
based in his well-established dissociative coping mechanisms that have kicked into overdrive thanks to the stress and social pressures of Milgram, and the circumstances of Milgram in general, mikoto finds himself increasingly desperate to entirely cut himself off from and dissociate from everything he cannot tolerate about his acts and that he hates about himself. by conforming himself to labels coercively applied to him, gauging the expectations of authority figures, and changing himself to appease those in power, mikoto makes attempts to secure his safety to do so, successfully discouraging the warden and audience from interrogating and blaming the normative 'him', and instead directing the heat and blame to his ‘other’ self that can bear the label of ‘murderer’, protecting his normative self from shouldering the responsibility for his crime that he cannot bear — or survive — confronting.
conclusion / tl;dr:
mikoto is a highly adaptable, socially conscious character, who comes from a culture that values functioning, social cohesion, and conformity. due to how he has developed in his environment, mikoto finds himself prone to repressing and disowning parts of himself, including his anger, his socially unacceptable acts, his overwhelming internalised shame, the fact that he struggles with his mental health, and the fact that, under the pressure of his life and expectations, he commit mass murder, amongst other things. this leads him to display dissociative tendencies, such as feeling like he is 'not himself' at times, or that his acts were not perpetrated by 'him'.
upon being taken to Milgram, his normative reality-illusion that is phobic of all intolerable acts and parts of himself is challenged violently, and after being triggered very severely and voted unforgiven in the first trial, mikoto finds himself in a very vulnerable social and mental spot, and is unable to maintain a sense for himself that he is normal and okay. this leads him to feel 'not like himself' a lot more often.
towards the end of the first trial, due to kotoko's suggested diagnosis in attempting to explain his strange behaviour, figures of authority around him (es and the audience) begin to apply the label and model of DID onto him. with this came the characters' and audience's stigmas, preconceptions, and preestablished narratives around DID, which, due to always reading the room and hearing the audience's voices, mikoto becomes attuned to, which influences his character development, self-image, and way in which he begins to understand and frame his crime to himself and others.
mikoto, as a socially vulnerable person with a weak sense of self, begins to introject narratives around himself, his suffering from mental illness, and his having DID, which impacts how he engages with the other prisoners (mainly by self-isolating and assuming they will be or should be scared of him), and relates to himself (wherein he begins to internalise a belief that he has other, uncontrollable selves that are dangerous and wrong, and shames and abuses them for being that way).
mikoto also, having internalised this, acts according to this way of understanding himself during his Neoplasm interrogation, and performs himself according to conventional understandings of overt personality shifts to distinguish his 'other' selves (that are defined by their distance from his normative demeanour, and their conformity to Milgram’s expectations around his identity), and uses his high social consciousness, responsiveness, and the expectations es demonstrates according to their understanding of how he as a 'person with DID' functions, to get them on board with the assertion that the normative 'mikoto' should not be held responsible for his crimes, and securing for himself a forgiven verdict without challenging the warden’s assertion that he commit murders, allowing himself to protect himself from further abuse and interrogation.
this strategy has the added benefit of reinforcing to mikoto his own desirable belief that the ‘him’ that considers 'himself' is guilty of nothing that could warrant criticism or scrutiny, and that everything intolerable he has done and is that he been forced to face is 'not actually him', and will imminently vanish from his life, reassuring him that he may have a chance to escape Milgram physically and relatively psychologically unscathed, to continue self-destructing in repression and overwork, like he is expected to, in peace.
in this way, mikoto's DID label, although abusively established and used to dehumanise him, becomes a valuable tool for getting himself out of a murder charge that he would otherwise not be able to bear confronting, or make a compelling argument to excuse himself for. by conforming to rudimentary understandings of DID and manners in which people with DID have been dehumanised, mikoto is able to present and see himself as a binary of selves, which becomes vital not only for protecting himself psychologically, and allowing himself to act in the ways Milgram requires him to without entirely shattering his normative identity, but also for convincing others that his psychological and coercively-applied-to-him binary is practical and 'real', allowing him to physically escape punishment for his acts, and assure himself and others that his other 'self' that he hates and blames for all his flaws and humanity, can be separated from him and 'vanished' for good.
epilogue / reflection
real ones know how much this essay made me want to die. i seriously didn't expect it to be so long i promise. i don't know what happened. it regularly brought me into fits of despair. but it's done. i'm glad i wrote it but i'm also so glad it's over.
i'm never writing on this dipshit again. sayonara you weeaboo shits.
(^ this is a joke. but i don't think i have anything else to say about him at the moment! i think this and my other essays really might be the vast majority of my views on his presentation. i'll probably have more to say come T3 but, for now, shrug.)
as always, please let me know if any of this is incomprehensible (whether thats grammar, my word choice, or my trains of logic). i am very happy to clarify and reword bits, it is important to me that my essays can be understood by anybody!
and, congratulations for finishing, you have read very almost 10k of non-stop mikoto analysis. go drink some water and take an eye break. please. for me. thank you!
i have written this post to be emotionally evocative as a way to explicitly make frustrations and questions about Mikoto’s Trial 3 abundantly clear and also as a way to encourage people to vocalize their true thoughts and feelings on his Trial 3 through being an example of one. if you are discomforted, angered, riled up, shaken, or left with more questions/thoughts by this compilation-essay-ish then i have achieved what i intended with this post. the propaganda of civility and niceness in the end is really just censorship of talking about weighty subjects and i would rather assist in opening up the floor to dialogue especially when MILGRAM presents the perfect opportunity to talk about topics that are otherwise taboo in everyday conversations.
i will reiterate this at the end of the post but i encourage you to debate, retort, add-on, challenge, or whatever sort of dialogue you want to add/engage in any points that may or may not have been brought up in this post.
word count: 3077
people hating Mikoto's trial 3 are too enraptured with the label of DID on him that they forget that he's a character that just happens to have dissociative behaviors. he's not made to be DID's spokesperson.
how different would people cast their judgement if his diagnosis label was CPTSD instead? the symptoms of DID are the exact same symptoms found in CPTSD. what if he wasn't diagnosed with any mental illness at all? would people judge differently?
people are shitting on Mikoto's story because it doesn't live up to their fetish of DID-- that Mikoto didn't end up being their little symptomatic DID performance animal.
people forget that psychiatry is founded upon the criminalization of Others in order to systemically subjugate and dehumanize people through the power of a label’s reduction and the pathologization of a set of behaviors that are outside of a governing authority’s allowance. for example, it has historically been used as a tool of colonization where Others are “savages” and “psychopaths”, thus are not rational, thus are not human. it’s been used historically and presently to deny people of basic rights, dehumanize persons, and is used as a “reason” to hide this vulnerable demography away and/or abandon them.
Mikoto is a victim of psychiatrization, reduced to the label of “DID” by MILGRAM’s authority which—despite being an abusive and violating institution—is left unchallenged or uncriticized by people. instead, people are playing into this system of systemic abuse and violation and control of bodies throught engaging with its wants and games of dehumanizing individuals and the game of blame, rather than thinking carefully and critically about the system-institution and challenging it.
there’s claims that MILGRAM’s writers are using DID as a trope when, in reality, it’s being used a device to challenge the real world approach to mental illnesses being used primarily in mass media, such as the news, as attention-grabbing mechanisms rather than it just be a part of life like any other disability. the only mentally ill people you tend to hear about are those who transgressed societal norms so severly in an act of explicitly uncontestable social disorder, thus that person is finally diagnosed with a mental disorder as an attempt for insitutions of authority to explain disordered behavior through imposing a label that absolves the institution of blame and shifts it to an individual rather than tackling the failings of societal structures that is inhabitable to people thus creating inability to cope, thus “disorder”. the only reason that Mikoto’s mental illness is even a factor is the first place is due to the social panoptic need/pressure norms to paint those who are struggling with impossible demands as “insane” or “crazy” rather than a product of society.
like my wonderful oomf brought up, it’s not that Mikoto had mental illness and thus committed murder, he committed murder and then was labeled as mentally ill.
people seem to have forgotten that the prisoner/sinner reports (and diagnoses) are written by a biased authority: MILGRAM. if “Let’s rewind the clock to when Mikoto…” doesn’t sound like a recounting of a story rather than an objective log of a series of events, i don’t know what to tell you. the MV end report-files are in-universe files that the MILGRAM institution holds and authors. it only serves to give additional context but is written to how MILGRAM is to perceive the character.
there is also a clear demarcation and separation between the MILGRAM institution and the writers of the series, in which the writers are quite clearly trying to make people criticize MILGRAM and the institution(s) it represents or parallels. people are blaming Yamanaka for characters or the story not being exactly what they want it to be when, in reality, they should be redirecting that discontent and anger towards the real-world that MILGRAM is written to quite literally mirror.
yurusu doesn't just mean "innocent" or "forgive", it also means "affirm".
people can't seem to yurusu Mikoto who has now gained and developed the philosophy of (1) acknowledging his crime and wanting to atone— he will atone according to his Trial 3 VD; (2) challenging Es/you wardens' belief that he's innocent because John's the guilty one, instead claiming responsibility because even if a person doesn't remember their crimes at all, the person still committed a crime; (3) Mikoto finally accepting those parts of himself that he rejected and hated; (4) Mikoto developing a healthier behavior of self-compassion and self-understanding, rather than suppression, and actually working towards a better him; (5) working with himself with what he can do and being patient if he can't do it all right now.
people who can't seem to yurusu Mikoto's healthy character growth are baffling. it's been established since the conception of MILGRAM in 2020 that every single one of them is guilty of the act of murder, in which the law that decides guilt is based on the norms of society (thus leading to Yuno's case of abortion being considered murder). it has been a known fact. if you are voting him based on if he's guilty of the crime or not, then why not vote Muu guilty? why not vote Yuno, Amane, Kazui guilty, all of whom were voted innocent?
what makes Mikoto any different?
if you can't forgive Mikoto due to the amount of victims he has or the brutality of his crime, then are you going to choose to unforgive him, thus deny and disaffirm his character development and newfound healthier mentality (that will not only benefit himself but also others should he be rehabilitated/reintegrated back into society) all because of that emotional disgust? will you completely lock Mikoto who-is-alive out of the chance for becoming a person that will actually help people after rehabilitation and help that he needed all these years?
his victims are a tragedy, yes, that can be acknowledged but they are dead. fixating on the dead does nothing for the living. the dead can no longer affect reality. only the living can. the living can choose to change the systems that kills its members, whether directly or indirectly. if you are outraged by by 12 victims’ lives ending then be outraged at and tackle the systemic issues that create these deaths. the dead are dead. focus on the living now in order to preven other Mikotos from happening but also focus on how to help those who may relate to Mikoto and those who are Mikotos. be outraged at the labor systems, the social culture of not speaking about what you’re feeling and the taboo of—not just talking about—but also mentally ill people existing, of disabled people existing. the reason he committed those murders wasn’t because he was mentally ill. it’s because of systemic stratae of abuses that made him explode because he could no longer just implode.
this Mikoto Trial 3 so far is showing how plenty of people view judgement as a whole as punishment, rather than rehabilitation or incentive to help. it can explain why there’s witch hunts and how if people don’t like what a someone says, they try to punish that person through means of tarnishing repute, talking shit, harassment, etc.
do you only care about punishment? punishment on those that disgust you? punishment on those that don't fit into your ideas of what a person should be? punishment on those that don't fit your expectations? do you actually care about justice or do you only say you do because that's what's expected of you?
have you considered that each flash of the victim profiles in Requiem can be read as the moments that the abuses of his workplace and compounding stress from his life reached that certain point that locked in the death of those victims? the straws that broke the camel's back? the souls that were destroyed?
there weren't just 12 victims in that mass murder. it was 13. Mikoto is a victim of the normalized exploitive late-stage capitalistic society in which corporations quite literally run the nation legislative-wise and determine the cultural and economic norms. if Mikoto hadn't been driven to the point of a psychotic break due to 100 days of overwork and workplace abuse, and possible assault, in a society where even talking about feelings to your closest persons are strange or taboo and extreme extended sleep deprivation where dream and reality became blurred that led to him committing an act that is essentially social suicide— death in Japanese society, that murders his youth, his potential, his opportunities, his future and how many people he could have helped with how importance design is in the world. the failings and flaws of contemporary Japanese society murdered this youth and who he could've been.
i don't understand people who are saying his story got retconned.
do you need it to be explicitly stated that he experienced This Specific Trauma And That Specific Trauma in order to have him play into the fetishization of DID performance to be a True DIDer?
i’ve seen flack on Mikoto for supposedly being worse DID representation (despite not being made to be a rep for DID) than M. Night Shyamalan’s Kevin Wendell Crumb in Split (2016) but this is the thing: Mikoto is still dissociated and amnesiatic about his home and family life. there are aspects in all his VDs, timelines, and interrogations that show that his parent’s divorce is still affecting him— feeling that John “disappearing” is just like a father leaving— “abandoning everything and disappearing” (milgram-en) and leaving it all up to him to pick up what he abandoned; his father and/or John.
there are so many behavioral signs of Mikoto being a child of divorce with his abandonment issues and fixation on being liked by people so that he wouldn’t get abandoned again like how kid-him felt when his dad left in the divorce.
to a child it may feel like they weren’t good enough and that’s why the parent left, which explains Mikoto’s people pleasing behaviors and attempts to be friendly with everyone so they don’t abandon him. it also explains why he’s sensitive towards rejection. kids typically have egocentric thinking in not yet developing a sense of independent self from their caretakers, which could have made Mikoto think that his parent leaving was because he wasn’t good enough or likeable enough, hence his desperation for being liked and accepted and affirmed (such as the birthday timeline with Kotoko where he was restless until Kotoko wished him a Happy Birthday).
there’s so many signs that he was a neglected child with his hyperindependence and fixation on being capable, in which neglect is the most common reason for the development of DID in Japan. there’s signs that he’s an incest victim through the Eldest Child being the emotional support of his mother and the only masculinity that the Father role was placed unto, through both emotional incest and parentification through having to parent his younger sister despite being a kid himself— now a grown kid who’s still learning the ropes of a new world, the adult world, all on his own. there’s also signs that he was an assault victim through his fawning and people pleasing behaviors that could be an attempt to avoid being victimized again, not to mention how he dresses with his skin mainly covered with jackets/long-sleeves/pants/etc., only wearing clothes that reveal more skin area in privacy.
his obsession with normalcy and idealization of it also hints towards Mikoto never having had a normal and stable life and that’s what he just wants so badly.
John “disappearing” is claimed from an unreliable narrator (Mikoto) and an unreliable authority (Es/Jackalope) that have their own biases and understanding thus phrasing of things. in reality, John was just suppressed by Mikoto as he represents the parts of himself that he didn’t like, didn’t want to be, and didn’t want to accept is a part of him. not to mention, John is in the Requiem song. you can hear him as the second vocal part or voice, present from the beginning of the song as a very faint and quiet harmonization, to clear duets and solos with the other vocal part, Mikoto, all the way to the end of the song as a musical device to show that they’ve always been together but now actually acknowledging and accepting it all. hell there’s a call-and-response repeating throughout the song with the chord plucking and the higher pitch plucking as the response.
Mikoto expressing multiple self-states weren’t retconned either. we primarily got a professional, working adult Mikoto as the primary player in Trial 1, a protective big brother/hypermasculine figure that Mikoto never had due to his father leaving in the divorce in Trial 2, and the guttural, newborn crying a crying that’s instinctual and has so much potential for growth, development, and learning as children are much more understanding and open to everything, including accepting things that adults have a hard time swallowing in Trial 3, not to mention T3koto phrasing things like a kid despite being adept at language to express himself in a clear manner at other parts of his dialogue with Es.
Mikoto being born in Shibuya doesn’t mean that the interrogation answer of him coming from a Not Big City was retconned either. a person can be born in a big city in a hospital that has more resources and staffing but actually grew up somewhere else. it’s not uncommon for someone to say they come from where they grew up in rather than where they were born.
i’ve seen people thoughtlessly yapping and disregarding Mikoto having complex trauma, ergo leading to the development of a complex trauma set of behaviors, due to coming from a middle class family. he may have been middle class and from an “average” family but you can still be traumatized despite being born into a family that may have easier access to the potential of support in a society that famously lacks accessible and destigmatized social/community support. the invalidation of his struggles due to the socioeconomic class he comes from (that is arguably negated by being a child of a single mother, and the only masculinity in an otherwise majority feminine household situated in a severely patriarchal sexist nation) tangentially reminds me of dialogue akin the line of “you have a roof over your head, there’s food on the table, you get everything you need, so why the hell are you crying or saying that life is hard?”
it’s strange seeing people saying that his writing or story is weak because Trial 3 didn’t explicitly talk about his childhood or traumas or home life of a person from years ago that caused his dissociative behaviors to develop considering MILGRAM is about the now and present where the crime happened. we don’t even get anything about Amane beyond her life during the crime itself, yet i don’t see people calling for Yamanaka’s death with Amane or calling her writing chopped.
those who complain that Mikoto is unrealistic and badly written because of that "unrealistic"ness are spitting on so many people who do relate to him — all those complex trauma victims, all those complex trauma victims that seem to contradict themselves because of all those conflicting emotions that may come from expressing their own history or even opinions (thus affecting memory or what the brain can handle), all those "imperfect victims", all those non model mentally ill persons that don't have digestible and "perfect" presentations of a condition, and every other way that a person can relate to him — are part of the ableism you may claim to be against yet, you enforce through creating a radioactive weapon carved with words that outlast civilizations, through festering stigmatization, ableism, dis-compassion, and un-empathy through your sort of discourse proliferating like a disease through the internet's memetic battleground that cares more about virality rather than actual critical thought, self-reflection, and action for systemic change. you are a hypocrite.
you are also a hypocrite if you preach about ableism yet you reduce Mikoto to just a mental illness character. you restrict his complexity, his wholeness, his humanity to just his DID.
you are a hypocrite if you complain about the bad writing of “his crime being done because of DID” because you are reducing his entire character to a mental illness when, in reality, anyone would have broken through a lifetime of suppressed emotions in a society that forcibly hammers down emotions and expression whilst facing abuse, neglect, pressure and expectations, sexism, objectification, and even more abuse and bullying on top of 100 days of consecutive work at a company that practices what people have been referring to as “modern day slavery” for decades, all alone with no support interpersonally, socially, or society-wise, and the first form of stress release you get is substance abuse via downing a whole bottle of Smirnoff Ice vodka despite the clear signs of malnourishment from lack of being able to eat well due to overwork that unlocks far too many emotions in its depressant qualities to a brain that’s unprepared to handle it and a body not yet able to stomach it. you are ignoring the whole person in favor of constraining them to just one label imbued with so many expectations that reduce a person into the stereotype or trope you preach is there but, in reality, you are the one expecting, searching, and forcing it on. you are the ableistic person you claim yourself to be against.
those who encourage anti-intellectualism and further isolation thus stigmatization of DID through the process of making it taboo to even breathe about if you are not part of the plural in-group (i make a distinction here by phrasing it as plural rather than multiple or pwDID) that theatricalizes DID into a flanderized bastardation plurality of it are part of the problem. as my good oomf said, “you do not need to be anything or prove anything to have fair discussions on weighty subjects”.
anyways, these are just my messy preliminary thoughts so far. i’ll likely have more in due time and especially when Mikoto’s T3 interrogation releases.
i explicitly encourage you to debate, add on, or literally any form of dialogue and discourse regarding the points brought up in this post. all i ask is that you actually think about what you have read and what you actually think and believe.
i won because MILGRAM paid off with exploring how modern cultures and societies (particularly Japanese) require and reward a subclinical dissociative baseline , which conditions us to stigmatise and ignore and disavow the parts of us that cannot fit in the roles we are expected to enact , who experience pain and exhaustion and unhappiness , which – in the face of long-term and mounting sociocultural neglect and abuse that triggers acute outbursts of what had previously been taken as burden with no place to go – makes us vulnerable to scapegoating and psychiatrisation , because in the absence of obvious reason for (or ability to truly identifiy with any reason for) our behaviour , we must be the problem; there must be a demon – i mean mental sickness – within us that caused all of this sudden, disintegrated, irrationality.
like, looking at the response to T1, and even later votes, the amount of discussion that took for granted the idea that mikoto killed for absolutely no sane or sympathetic reason, and instead hinged on the question of how we feel about his culpability as someone allegedly functionally possessed, was staggering.
his diagnostic label drew all scrutiny to him and the question of his rationality alone, and any hints towards true motivations or contexts that may have given rise to genuine sympathy for his circumstances as a murderer were completely ignored. come T2, even when illuminated about how genuinely parts of him believed he was close to death under his job circumstances and how it was this that sent him into his violent dissociative lapse, the discussion again hinged on his final plea that the symbol of his mental disorder – the entity allegedly functionally possessing him – would vanish if he were forgiven. practically all of his voting has always been about how we felt about the source of his crime, as something within him. it was discussed, do we forgive him for being sick; and do we forgive his alter, for being monstrous and stupid?
at best, there was sympathy-spinning and speculation, through searching for evidence of dramatic childhood abuse as reason for his dissociative disorder. but instead of that theorising being used to find potential reasons for why he so clearly struggles to feel agency over his acts and identity, which may give us good ideas for the damaging circumstances he puts himself into and feels he cannot leave as an adult, it was used as the be-all and end-all. because once the disorder was there, so was the crime. the question wasn't, are we sympathetic about what caused him to kill?, but, are we sympathetic about what caused his DID, (which caused him to kill)?
and of course it's not that MILGRAM didn't intentionally play into this reading. John Doe was very intentional about having kotoko steer the discourse towards this interpretation of his case. Neoplasm was also very intentional about es and mikoto also coming to approach his case accordingly, based on the response of the audience to his character that es is written to reflect and mikoto is conditioned to conform to.
but, man. it's a pitfall. it's a superficial way to judge him, it's a logical fallacy, it's unfair, and it's dehumanising. it's self-serving speculation, and interpretation, and questioning and carceral enforcement based around the ideas that we like. and it's one we as the audience are entirely allowed to do, given the position of power we have been given. and yknow, i dunno. isn't that interesting? how far we misrepresented and mistreated a guy, thanks to the power of his coercively applied psychiatric label, and the dominant narratives that exist around it? how far we completely trusted the angle on this person's case, that was spoonfed to us in the narrative, by abusive and violent cops 1 and 2?
we're coming up to the end of the project called MILGRAM. the one that really obviously alludes to the experiment that tested how far people will believe in and abuse authority. i really do believe this kind of reflection and critique of the audience's response is exactly the point for the project's existence.
If you haven't watched Mikoto's T3 MV, this is your last and only warning for spoilers!
Seeing as I am very amateur at this, I am not formatting the profiles in the correct sections. The lines may not be translated in the order they are shown either. I am just typing up like a summary of what I understood ("understood" pfft yeah. Any big words or difficult phrases I had to use google translate. The cause of death translations were all google translate). And I will slip in occasional commentary.
(Sometimes I replace culprit/suspect with 009. All "prisoner number 009" has been shortened to 009 for convenience. After stating the full name for the victim, I refer to the victim by their surnames.)
Nakabayashi Taishi
Nakabayashi is unemployed and homeless, his cause of death was cerebral contusion from a severe blow to the head. He has no fixed address and uses parks and streets as his living space He used to run a business but got tricked by a friend. Since then he was in a mental state that made working difficult, leading to his current situation. He was sleeping in a makeshift tent under a bridge near where 009 lived. Nakabayashi poked his head out aaaaand bat to the head (you know how it goes). Nakabayashi was found by a cleaner the next morning, reported to the police. It was determined that the following murders were done by the same person.
2) Sekine Hisashi
Sekine is also unemployed, his cause of death was open injury due to skull fracture. He was a high school drop out that did short term part time jobs like at construction sites and moving companies (did not secure anything stable). He belongs to a bike (motorcycle) team in Tokyo?? After shopping at a convenience store, he was attacked in a dark are near his home. 009 was seen approaching behind in a security footage, Sekine collapsed, still holding shopping bags. CPR was attempted when paramedics arrived but he was pronounced dead at the hospital.
3) Kirishima Yuugo
Kirishima was a freeter (part time worker), his cause of death was brainstem injury due to a severe blow to the base of the skull. He was a high school drop out and works as a convenience store clerk and cleaner at a pachinko parlor as a cleaner, plus other jobs. (I really can't read this part sob...) Kirishima also works as a kitchen staff and hanging out with friends is part of his daily routine. He was attacked in a back alley on the way home and suffered heavy bleeding from a blow to the face. No signs of valuables or wallet being touched. Several minutes later, he was found by a passing cyclist. Kirishima was pronounced dead at the hospital.
4) Seo Ryou
Seo was a college student, his cause of death was cerebral hemorrhage. He studies at at private university and works part time at a café. [Something something], Seo rides a bike for long distances around Tokyo. He's started late night practice of something (exams? races?). During late night cycling, he got attacked when he took a break and pushed his bicycle. 009 struck the victim's head at close range causing skull fracture. The bicycle was left next to Seo. He was found the next morning by a convenience store clerk who called the police. Seo was pronounced dead immediately after arriving the hospital.
5) Kawashima Shinji
Kawashima works in sales, his cause of death was massive internal bleeding due to ruptured spleen. He works at a mid-sized trading company in the sales department in the city. He has two children that are primary school students. (Can't read, but I think it says something like he has a lot of experience with something). He was walking to the main street looking for a taxi, he entered a narrow alley and encountered 009. His whole body was beaten severely, the police was searching the neighbourhood (due to the reports of other incidents) when they found him. Kawashima was pronounced dead at the hospital.
6) Kutsuna Ayumi
Kutsuna was a high school student, cause of death was respiratory arrest due to cervical spine injury. She attends a private high school, active on social media with ~10 thousand followers. She was scouted by an agency and began her career in the entertainment industry. She works a part time job late at night at a Japanese pub. After working at a pub in an entertainment district, she was attacked when walking home from the station. She had headphones on and didn't hear someone approach from behind. School bag was nearby, nothing was taken. Police who had been receiving numerous reports, arrived at the scene.
7) Inoue Hinata
Inoue was working at a host club. His cause of death was cardiac arrest due to blow to the chest. Inoue has been working at a host club for two years. He trains at the gym and promotes [himself?] on social media. (I can't really read the rest...) Inoue finished his shift at the host club and was walking home from the train station closest to his home. While walking through the back alley, he encountered 009 and got struck in the chest by a metal bat. The scene had no sign of struggle, all belongings were untouched. Police arrived after receiving reports of the incidents and confirmed the death on scene.
8) Yoshikawa Sana
Yoshikawa's cause of death is impaired consciousness due to acute subdural hematoma. She works at a lounge at an entertainment district and is a single mother. She has a child that she leaves in the care of her mother (child's grandma). Used to work at a [chain store/restaurant?] full time but changed occupation to work at a lounge (can't read the reason). Yoshikawa took a taxi home after work and was attacked when walking to her apartment entrance. The apartment's security camera caught the back of 009. The building manager discovered her lying on the ground, her face down. Her death was confirmed at the hospital she was taken to.
9) Ishibara Ryujirou
Ishibashi was a company executive/director, his cause of death was hemorrhagic shock due to massive bleeding. He was a director of an IT startup company in Tokyo. After graduating from university, he worked at a telecommunications company for 3 years. He took part in establishing the (current) company, he is now in charge of corporate planning department. He frequently had business dinners and drinking parties with clients. Something about a health issue worsening. It is believed he was attacked behind a park in a residential area on the way home. There are multiple blunt force trauma marks on the face and head suggesting attack from close range. Nearby houses' security cameras recorded Ishibashi turning around, startled by noise. He had severe bleeding from head trauma and was already dead when discovered.
10) Higure Natsuko
Higure was self employed, her cause of death was neurogenic shock due to circulatory failure. She began living alone after her husband passed away and her son went to university. She centered her life around looking after her pet dog. Kept [something] to a minimum and [something] had a habit of walking her dog. She was suddenly attacked while taking her dog for a walk in a residential area near her home. The dog was left unharmed but Higure suffered severe injuries all over and collapsed. A leash was found on the ground and the dog kept barking. The incident was reported, when paramedics arrived she was already in cardiac arrest. She was brought to hospital and was confirmed dead.
11) Tamura Kaisei
Tamura was a security guard, his cause of death was cerebral contusion due to severe blow to the head. He was employed for 8 years at Shibuya branch (?). He entered a security company [after high school? Might be imagining that] , he worked at [can't see. Maybe residential/commercial buildings?]. Something monitor support. Had trust of his colleagues (????). While on security duty, he heard a dog barking near the site. He left his post to investigate. A woman was found near the barking dog. He tried to report it but culprit was nearby [can't see rest of the line]. Was struck on the head from behind.
12) Nago Kei
Nago was an employee of a design company, his cause of death was acute subdural hematoma. He worked at a design company in Tokyo. Had a diligent personality (?) highly regarded by his colleagues. Works in [???], presentation of a project was successful. (I cannot see the rest.) Nago was on his way home from a restaurant, he mistaken the suspect for being an injured person (as 009 was covered in blood and sitting on the tracks). When he spoke to them and took his phone to call the ambulance, Nago was beaten violently from behind. He was the last victim of 009. (Cannot read last line. Might be 救急 which means something like to handle an emergency. 救 = save, 急 = sudden/urgent. Thank you Sandy for helping me with this!!)
Disclaimers: I'm not fluent at Japanese and probably have hallucinated words into the profiles that when couldn't read the line (my questionable eyesight...) so if anyone has anything to add on or correct, please do! And if you see a full proper translation of these profiles please send me a link, thank you!
Final note on boundaries: Please do not put criticism of Mikoto's T3 or Milgram in general in a place I cannot easily avoid (ahem, reblogs, comments, my inbox). It is not to say I do not have my own personal criticisms such as 'ah it probably would've been better if it was done this way' but such topics are something I prefer to discuss only with people I trust.
(And lastly, although I wasn't translating word for word, I avoided adding/removing any details to make Mikoto look better or worse. If I took things out it was usually because I didn't know what it was. And if I added something by accident, sorry, I'm tired. Keep voting discourse away, thanks!)
Bee facts incoming! This is my way of celebration, I have been waiting for this. Arthropods and Milgram are synonymous fandoms in my head and it started thanks to Muu. Obligatory disclaimer, I am not an entomologist, just an enthusiast. And generally, I'll be talking about honeybees or bumblebees (apis and bombus). Without further ado, let's begin!
Starting with the low level facts first: did you know that Queen Bees don't actually have much commanding power? They are easily disposable, much like Muu was. The hive is run by the worker bees (all female) and all of them work together to call the shots for the greater good of the hive. The Queen Bee is just special in the sense that she's the only one in the hive with her role. Arguably, Muu was unique in the sense of her privileged background. She is able to give things to her "friends" and keep herself useful for the hive, her general popularity due to appearance and wealth also made her a symbol of security in the "hive". That would probably be the equivalent of QMP (Queen Mandibular Pheromone).
More on QMP: It is produced at the Queen's mandibular glands and it's got 5 main components (I won't go into the details of organic chemistry). The functions of QMP includes: "controlling" the worker bees to look after the Queen (attendance and grooming); suppress worker bees from constructing Queen Bee cells (don't worry I will get into the difference of larva cells later); delay swarming (putting simply, a swarm is basically when the hive all flies in a group to relocate); stimulate hive productivity (comb construction, nurturing young, foraging, food storage... Without this, worker bees would not do anything); attract drones (male bees) for mating; inhibit development of worker bees' ovaries.
Maybe it is self contradictory to say Queens have little commanding power and then immediately explain what QMP does. However there is actually no genetic difference between worker bees and Queen Bees at birth. So really, it works as another accidental or possibly intentional parallel with Muu. Nature vs nurture. Muu was born a normal girl but raised differently to the vast majority (and she looks different too. Supposedly. If we ignore how her hair color is normal compared to the blue, red, green....Queen Bees can be up to double the size of worker bees. Definitely stands out in appearance.) Queen Bee larvae are fed royal jelly for their whole life but worker bee larvae switch to the standard diet of bee bread (pollen and honey) early on. Muu, similarly, would've been growing up with special treatment and getting better things than others (at least on a materialistic level). (On a side note, the green thing Muu is served in INMF looks like larva...)
Another difference in nurture is that the brood capping of larva cells of Queens vs workers is structure and density. Queen, worker and drone cells all look different. Worker bee larva cells are 'closed' in a flat kind of way. Drone cells are closed in a way that sticks out slightly, it's like a dome 'puffed out'. Queen bee larva cells usually stick out at the bottom of the frame if it's a second queen for swarming cell or in the middle if it's a replacement queen cell (in the case of honeybees), some would describe it kind of like a peanut. (Not including a picture in case anyone reading has trypophobia, look it up if you're interested tho, I think its quite cool). (Also, Queens and workers have no initial genetic difference because all female bees come from fertilised eggs but drones come from unfertilised eggs.)
Back to royal jelly, it's a nutrient dense food source for Queen bees (and larvae less than 3 days after hatching). It is what allows Queen Bees to live much longer than workers (Queens live a few years whereas workers only live a few weeks. Granted, royal jelly isn't the only reason as the Queen Bee would be protected by the workers). That said, royal jelly is not magic. If a larvae has been fed bee bread for a while before going back to royal jelly, you're not gonna get a very good queen. Bee bread has an inhibitor of ovary development. Mature Queen Bees cannot eat royal jelly by themselves, they must be fed by workers. This is how workers actually control the Queen (one of the reasons why the Queen's position is actually rather unstable in my opinion, as said, the hive works as a matriarchal democracy, not a monarchy. Monarchy wouldn't work anyway, all members of the hive are siblings....)
There are a few reasons why workers would stop feeding their Queen royal jelly but I'm only going to focus on the reason most similar to Muu. Supersedure is the process of a honeybee colony replacing a failing Queen without swarming. (Failing as in she's old, or she's injured or she's just not performing her function as intended). It's a survival mechanism done for the 'greater good of the hive', nothing personal (I mean it when I say it's not personal. Worker bees will go off alone to die away from the hive when they sense their time is up to ensure the survival of the hive because their carcass would cause problems). Basically supersdure starts by raising a new Queen (special cell, royal jelly, all that special treatment). Then the workers would stop feeding the Queen (as stated earlier, the Queen can only eat by being fed by workers). Once the new Queen is ready, the workers cluster around the old Queen, vibrate to generate friction and heat that kills her.
Would I say Rei is the new Queen? Nope. Absolutely not. If anything Rei's more like an outsider who managed to injure the Queen (Muu), inhibit the Queen's ability to maintain her function in the hive. Honestly, Rei would remind me of a cuckoo bee if it weren't for the fact she wasn't able to blend in. Either way though, the chair incident reduced Muu's status among her peers. And so said injury (literally and metaphorically) would've messed with her metaphorical QMP, causing the workers to no longer look after her. They turned on her because she could no longer contribute the way she used to. Now the difference is that in Pain and INMF, it's framed as rebellion. Of course, from Muu's side it seems that way. But to begin with, were her "friends" really on her side? I'm not sure. It probably wasn't personal but a calculated move to ensure their own social survival. I dunno what to call Muu's case though. Is it planned or emergency supersedure? Even if a Queen Bee was infected with something like nosema (its a parasite affecting the gut), the hive would focus on raising a new bee first as far as I know. For a Queen to be killed before she has a successor, it's more like a predator killed the Queen or a beekeeper accidentally squashed the Queen (beekeeper Rei???). Um well. I dunno if there was a new Queen or what so do what you will with the information I've given you.
Or perhaps, it still works if we make the killing part literal and not just like 'social death'. The bullying hasn't killed Muu yet maybe because they don't have a new Queen yet... And so they kind of somewhat still need her around until a new Queen's ready, even if it means they're drastically reducing the special treatment.
Oh by the way. Queen Bees can sting. But they're wayyyyy less venomous than a worker bee's. Usually Queens are docile but they use it to fight rival Queens. I guess you could use this to support Queen Rei theory if that's a thing at all. Ah but also, you know how Muu stabs Rei multiple times? Funny thing... Both honeybee and bumblebee queens can sting multiple times. All female bumblebees have smooth stingers that aren't barbed, but only honeybee queens would have that kind of stinger (worker honeybees have barbed stingers and die after stinging. Drones do not have stingers). Regardless if you want to treat Muu as an apis or bombus, as a Queen, she can attack multiple times.
To sum up, Queen Bees do not control the hive in a traditional sense. She just enjoys special privileges like royal jelly, protection, grooming etc because she's the only one who can lay eggs and produce QMP. But actual decisions like when to overthrow the Queen, when and where to swarm to, when to clean, where to forage, that's all the power of workers. Muu did not give orders for others to go after Muu like how a Queen Bee cannot order workers to attack threats. Rather workers will act on their own accord (collective decision of workers) and the alarm pheromones are released by the workers. When an intruder (Rei) enters the hive (the school), the workers would sting the threat without the Queen Bee doing anything different to her usual function.
WAIT ONE LAST THING. How many wings do you see that Muu has in INMF. Or how in her birthday art (they're not actually wings I know but how many "wings" would you say you see). Cuz uh. If she does not have 4 wings, we've got a big problem here. Bees are part of the Hymenoptera order, winged insects of this order has 2 pairs of clear wings with less venation compared to most other flying insects. If we're seeing like, only one pair of wing (two wings total), that would make Muu a true fly (order: Diptera). And if Muu has more than 4 wings, she'd be a prehistoric extinct species. (Obviously I'm not expecting accurate biology and it's not that deep, creative liberty is a thing, but it's for my own interest).
(Why didn't I talk about drones much? Uh. Muu went to an all girls school if I remember correctly. And drones are considered useless in the hive.... Their sole purpose is to mate which is irrelevant to what we know of Muu.)
End of part 1! I've probably info dumped too much already but I will be definitely yapping more about bee Muu in the future. Next time I will yap about some specific species and maybe we can decide what kind of bee she is!! (And possibly figure out what on earth Rei would be...) Um. Also feel free to ask questions if you're interested in any of this stuff.... As I've said, I'm not an entomologist and can definitely get things wrong but I'm enthusiastic enough to do the research and do my best to explain anything arthropod-related!
Suggested by Kyanako :3 I should’ve probably clarified at the time if it’s just these two options or mixing and matching further. I decided to leave it as is for now…. I can always redo…. But oughhhh kind of looks like I’m pitting them against each other in a popularity contest…. But at the same time it depends on how you interpret the question and options…
