This account, like others, will attempt to explain and dispell misinformation regarding extreme abuse, TBMC, and general systemhood. I do not claim to be a professional, and I am not a therapist, so do not treat me as such. Any opinions posted on this account are based on personal experiences and the research we do have available. Sources will be provided to the best of my ability.
I have no DNI as this blogs main purpose is to educate. If you're blocked it's because you annoy me.
People who were mistaken about having a CDD are still members of the system community and become A VALUABLE RESOURCE for new and questioning systems.
Who better to help someone else figure it out than someone who thought they had it and were mistaken? We need more people willing to talk about it and explain what the differences are and how to recognize signs that everything might not be as it seems.
And they already know everything they need and know how to be respectful of systems. What more could you ask for?
Something that's been frustrating me lately is certain communities chalking everything up to programming, including normal DID symptoms. Acting differently between parts, amnesia, and parts being triggered by different stimuli is an extremely normal DID experience and is not an inherent sign you're programmed.
hello! i don’t want to bother you, so i hope it’s okay if i send an ask (i’ve been scrolling through your page for a while, and as a major psych nerd + heavily suspected system, i’m really impressed with the depth/integrity of the information you post)
lately, we’ve been having some concerns about the origins of our system, especially regarding a proper “label” for the specific type of system we are. we are a traumagenic system that has undergone severe (although unintentional, we believe) conditioning since the body was very young (from ages 4-15, roughly), although we are certain there are no official “programs” instilled into us, not in the traditional sense. we show signs of operant/fear-based conditioning that affects our behaviors and thought processes heavily, as well as signs of polyfragmentation (we have just under 200 known parts now, most of whom have formed during severe yet unrelated periods of trauma).
based on this information, do you think the term “hc-did” would be appropriate for us to use? we don’t wish to offend anyone or use such a stereotyped phrase wrongly, but the signs are very clear to us and it would be nice to put a name to our experiences.
apologies again for the sudden ask, i hope you have a wonderful day/night! thank you for taking the time to read this!
-🔑⛓️
Since you're asking my opinion specifically- I don't think HC-DID is an appropriate term for anybody to use. I won't stop you, but in my opinion, it doesn't do any good. But, I doubt anybody who uses that label would be offended by it.
If your trauma history fits, I think it's fine to call yourself an OEA/RAMCOA survivor. I can't tell you if you're a programming survivor or anything like that, most of what you're asking depends on you on your own. Imo, stop worrying about if your trauma is severe enough for a label and focus on recovery. I'll also say that conditioning like that is also seen in "regular" CPTSD survivors, and can just be a factor of systemhood.
But that's just me, and this isn't meant to sound rude or dismissive. I think you know yourself best and I shouldn't be a deciding factor.
Dissociative experiences alter resting state functional connectivity after childhood abuse
von Schröder, C., Nkrumah, R.O., Demirakca, T. et al., February 2025
... findings underscore a distinct neural signature of childhood abuse-related dissociative experiences...
I had to laugh at the citations here
Based on prior findings and the high prevalence of dissociative experiences occurring alongside childhood abuse2,4,5,6,7,9,10,13,20,23,25,30,32,40,69,...
So, do you work with people with "real, diagnosed DID" or not, or were you lying and believe it's fake? Adding on to that, do you think organized abuse doesn't exist in general, or do you just have a poor understanding of what the terms "RAMCOA/OEA" means?
https://www.tumblr.com/outnumberedsins/772882849580908544/programming-vs-conditioning from this post.
You said that programmers do not need to know an exact science of how what they’re doing works, so I was wondering where the line was drawn? Not to get into too much detail, but we were “accidentally” programmed. In that I don’t think they knew the exact science in terms of creating DID or creating dissociative parts, however, we have so many of the hallmarks you and other’s have mentioned including responses, cues, and complex internal structures (side/sub systems/layers/IW structures.) Maybe it’s just because we’re running off of limited information and not enough memories from programming itself. Anyway, I just wanted to know where the line would be drawn between purposeful programming and not knowing the science and rigamarole behind all of that with it still working yk?
I asked a few friends to assist with writing this response, so hopefully, this makes sense.
You can't be programmed accidentally. Programming is inherently intentional because the abuser is looking to produce a specific response. In order to keep this response within an individual, the abuser will have to repeatedly enforce the abuse necessary to keep said response.
In cases where groups dont know the exact science, it's just a coincidence that DID develops. Since the abuse is so chronic and is displayed through many forms (e.g.: physical, sexual), a person will allocate that memory into a specific part, which in turn holds that response that the abuse produced. Allocating that instance into a part, with dissociative amnesia to cover that memory (survival tactic from the brain), prevents the person from reliving the memory in their everyday life, or get reminded from common/mundane triggers. An obscure trigger is assigned to bring that part out.
There are programmers that probably don't even know that disorders like DID exist, because there's no information regarding those disorders in their language or available to them. This makes it less likely for language like "DID" or "alters/parts/etc" to occur within these groups. This does not mean it was accidental.
TLDR:
Programming requires the intentional creation of dissociative states to hold the programmed responses, so if it wasn't intentional or didn't utilise dissociative states, it would be conditioning. The perpetrators may have no idea what DID is, or even what dissociative states are, let alone that that's how they are controlling their victims. They basically just have to know, "If Ido x, then I get y result." Where x is some form of inducing dissociation (through torture of some kind) and where y is some form of separate state that does what they want. That's still intentional because they are still intentionally hurting someone.
we have a suspected layer but for us its really weird.. we've only really encountered it and alters from it once.. and forus their innerworld literally took over ours? I mean.. they can exist seperately I think but to have them be able to front I think their innerworld kind of.. has to "slide down" to access the front room we have, which kicks our normal innerworld out
is this.. normal? or like.. possible?
Hi Anon. There's no real 'normal' or a list of things that are possible when it comes to innerworlds. At the end of the day, anything you can imagine is possible when it comes to them. But to be more specific, yes, what you've described is possible. I've seen and heard similar experiences from others, where specific parts of the innerworld, or a separate inner world, are only accessible when a part from there is active.
I would like to thank you for the content you post, as it's really hard to find informative posts that use any sort of sourcing and it's made it quite hard to learn about until I was able to find this account. It's even caused me to correct my own previous thoughts from previous misinfo. Thank you.
Thank you, anon! I'm very happy this account helps you. I was really sick of seeing a lot of baseless and contradictory claims within the community and thought I'd give this a shot. I know posts have kinda slowed down, but I hope when I do post, it's at least interesting, lol.
Trauma and mental illness aren't reserved for poor people. People who grew up middle class and upper class can also struggle with these things, and frequently do. Trauma doesn't discriminate and I'm tired of people acting like having money makes it so you obviously don't have anything wrong with you. I had fluctuating money when I was a kid (partially had to do with the fact that I bounced between families), sometimes we were dirt poor living on food stamps, and others we were really comfortable and affording yearly family vacations to all inclusive resorts in the Bahamas. Trust me, the trauma impacted me the same regardless of how much money my family had.
There aren't many good OA servers out there so I ended up putting together my own server with a couple other people
A few of the basics are
- No syscourse/discourse/politics
- Open to all OEA survivors (not just systems)
- Traumagenic only space (no endogenics or transIDs)
- Anti-misinformation and pro-recovery
- Must be in therapy or have a good support system
- No screenshotting and sharing with people outside the server
- Invite only
- 18+
This server does permit people who use the term RAMCOA. I personally do not and so we do have roles for people to provide which terminology they use. The server is for OA survivors as a whole and so we're not restricting a survivor space based on the terminology they use.
Check out the ⋆ ☽ Singularity ☾ ⋆ community on Discord - hang out with 8 other members and enjoy free voice and text chat.
being that we just have finished making this server there will be some things still worked on but it is open now.
Hot take, but I think the more recent OEA community very commonly forgets or excludes survivors who didn't go through severe MC or programming, despite those individuals likely being the most common victims. So, just a reminder, you don't have to be programmed to be an OA survivor.
I saw a post that disgruntled me enough to want to talk about this, so here we are. There seems to be a heavy amount of misinformation on what "counts" as OEA, often excluding adult victims and non-programmed victims. So, within this post, we'll go over what the terms "OA, MC, and RA" mean, as well as commonly construed myths.
Organized Abuse
all-encompassing.
Organized abuse is a wide term that includes experiences of ritual abuse and mind control but is in no way exclusive to them. Often, only organized child sexual abuse is mentioned, which leaves out a lot of experiences it includes.
The most simple definition of organized abuse is "Abuse that involves a number of people doing something together in a pre-planned and/or structured way, rather than acting alone." In short terms, abuse done by multiple people in a planned way. [1]
All groups under the RAMCOA/OEA label will fall under this category. This includes, but is not limited to, Cults, Trafficking Rings, Labor Camps, "Troubled Teen" Camps, Intra-Familial Organized Abuse, and other experiences that fall under this definition. This includes victims indoctrinated into cults, trafficked, or otherwise abused as adults, as well as children born or brought into it. Location of the abuse (at home, in a church, at school, at a daycare, etc) doesn't matter, and someone does not have to go through ritual abuse or mind control to have experienced organized abuse.
Ritual Abuse
not inherently satanic.
Ritual abuse is a term often confused with SRA, or "Satanic Ritual Abuse," an outdated and often harmful label for forms of organized extreme abuse. Not all forms of organized abuse are ritual abuse.
Ritual abuse can be defined as "Abuse that occurs in a context where symbols or activities have superstitious, supernatural, or religious connotations. It is organised, often involving multiple perpetrators, and the abuse often happens as part of a rite or ceremony." Alternatively, the word 'ritual' refers to "a rite, ceremony or pseudo- religious service which involves a series of actions performed in a fixed order and/or at certain times; something that is done in the same way whenever a particular situation occurs." [1] [2]
Because of this, ritual abuse can be defined while including spiritual themes and non spiritual themes. So, many definitions include other forms of abuse that is ritualized/specifically repeated in nature, such as on a specific day or time or in a specific order.
This type of abuse is most dominated in literature by satanic overtones, once again from the term SRA. However, this is not exclusive to satanic cults. Any group based on a belief system or using other reoccurring themes/abuse can perpetrate ritual abuse. Though ritual abuse is also more commonly linked with mind control and child abuse, programming and age have no impact on if an experience is ritual abuse or not.
Survivors of ritual abuse include things like ritualistic ceremonies, games, symbols, set-ups, abuse on specific days/holidays, abuse in a specific order, etc as common experiences.
Mind Control
programming and beyond
Mind control tends to be the term that receives the most problems, as many people tend to only think of programming when hearing it. However, MC is not exclusive to programming survivors, and many types of MC have been recognized.
A good definition of MC is "Methods of thought reform to force submission or information from enemies and victims, or to indoctrinate and increase cooperation in members and captors," and is a synonym to coersive persuasion, defined as "attempts to force people to change beliefs, ideas, attitudes or behaviors using psychological pressure, undue influence, threats, anxiety, and/or intimidation." [3] [4]
Programming is an example of the far end of mind control, a severe form of conditioning. However, things such as cult and religious indoctrination, psychic driving, terrified submission, etc, are all also forms of MC that can occur within organized abuse. MC is not exclusive to child victims, as most forms of MC can be performed at any age.
Thank you for reading. If you have any questions or additions, feel free to send an ask or reply to this post. A reminder that I am not a professional, I am flawed, and I am just doing my best.
Would “fully programmed” mean that all your cues happen and follow through not matter what?
and if you do have cues and they only happen / trigger out the correct alter or go through the action some of the time is that incomplete programming? Just genuinely wondering because with our past and some of the things we do know it is completely within question that we were incompletely programmed due to several factors. And also wondering for our own reference because we never saw ppl talking about anything like what we experience within our programming when we were more active here. Thanks!
honestly... i find the terms "incomplete programming" and "full programming" to be more confusing and harmful than useful. it feels like a strange form of trauma olympics to me, to say "im more programmed because mine is complete!!"
but... to actually answer the question, programming does naturally degrade over time as it is no longer being reinforced. yes, it could be that its "incomplete" or it could be natural degrading from lack of reinforcement... i dont think i could give a more specific answer without more context, which i wont ask for!
The terms incomplete/full programming are generally unhelpful as there's no clear definition on them, and honestly, theyres no exact box to put either in. I tend to just use the term "failing/degrading programming" to describe experiences of programming getting weaker, but this can occur in any level of programmed systems. A "fully programmed" system would still have some level of "failed/degrading" programming as soon as they figure out they're programmed. It just seems unnecessary to specify.
