Time to sharpen your mind's eye! Go grab a pillow! Any pillow! (I know you have one. If you don't, get one. Why do you not have one???)
Your goal is to hold the image of a pillow for at least 30-60 seconds. If you can hold onto the image for that long, you're ready for the next level!
Each level adds another layer of complexity to the visualization. Go as far as you're comfortable doing. If you want to improve your skills, come back and try to take on the higher levels! And no, I cannot reach all the way to the highest levels, but one day I'd like to!
Beginner:
Level 1: What’s the basic shape? Is it a square, a rectangle, or a circle? If it's not a simple 2d shape, you can pick one that's the closest. For example, an "S" shaped pillow can be a circle or oval for now
Level 2: What’s the basic or average color? If you're not sure because it has a busy pattern, get up and step away from your pillow until it's a blur. Whatever color the blur is will be the base or average color.
Intermediate:
Level 3: Now let's make the 2d shape more specific. pillows aren't perfect squares, focus on the dents and imaging someone pushing in or squishing the sides and corners. Don't hesitate to squish your pillow, cut a square piece of paper, or use Play-doh to squish if you want a reference to play with. If you started with a complex shape, like an "S", imagine parts of the circle or oval cut out. You can practice by cutting a circle or oval on a piece of paper, and then cutting out the top and bottom semi circles to make an "S".
Level 4: Time to make it 3d! A common trick is to imagine a "sandwich" of 2d shapes stacked on-top of one another. Like how the rectangular pages of a book leave you with a book that's a rectangular prism.
Advanced:
Level 5: 2 is better than one! Now you should have at least a copy. Even better if it's a different pillow entirely
Level 6: 3 is better than 2! Hey look, now you have enough for a bed- two for heads and one for hugging. Oh and at least one of them has to be different.
Level 7: It's texture time! Is the texture rough, like on a decoration pillow, or is it soft? Is it smooth like a cotton cover or is it raised and ridged like corduroy?
Nerd:
Level 8: What is the material of the pillow case? Usually pillow cases are made of cotton, but they can also be made from a synthetic fabric or even quilting material. There are wool pillows out in the wild. Wool.
Level 9: Let's stuff it! What kind of filling would you expect to be inside of it? Right now, the goal isn't to visualize the stuffing itself, instead it's to better visualize the overall shape and feel of the pillow. For example, if it's stuffed with bamboo fiber, it will be stiffer than one stuffed with synthetic down feathers. Unless you hate your pillow enough to cut it open, I recommend looking up different pillow fillings.
Level 10: Is there a trim, those little weird ruffle things, any significant stitched on patches, or anything glued on like plastic gems? (Which is a crime btw, decoration pillows just hurt my feelings) Those fixings can be a different material too, and there are lots of common styles that you may have seen before.
Impressive:
Level 11: It's time to give your pillow a stress test! How does the pillow deform when you pull on it, squish it, or even rip it? If you put holes in it, what does the filling look like? Or rip off those stupid glued on charms
Level 12: Now let's add more physics and motion. Gravity (or a lack of it), yeet the pillow, punch it, etc. What happens if something falls onto it, like your head when you flop into bed?
Level 13: Let's age up the pillow! What stains, wear, and tear are on it? The hard part is remembering where the asymmetrical pillow damage is when rendering the image. That and finding the motivation to look up how fabrics decompose overtime...
Level 14: You knew this was coming… Gimmie a pile of 5+ pillows. All of them are different. And on at least one of them, someone spilled their drink on it!
God:
Level 15: Describe to me the dimensions of the pillow using measurements
Level 16: What is the texture pattern on the pillow? You may need a magnifying glass for this.
Level 17: What do the parts of stuffing look like? Are they strands, feathers, or pieces?
Level 18: Look up how these pillows are made and then imagine yourself making one
Level 19: What are the positions and directions of each piece of stuffing?
If you made it this far, you definitely got past my skill level awhile ago and I can't comprehend where to go from here. Well done!
I've been working on a switching guide for years ;_; But I'm excited to be close to having a first stable rough draft!
The guide is going to be long, my current guess is around 40 pages, maybe less. However, the guide is broken down into 4 parts, and those parts are divided into chapters.
The guide is not traditional in any sense- while I do have a step-by-step process, the majority of the guide is about explaining fundamental concepts and the mindsets around switching. I start with concepts like trust and symbolism and work up to concepts like the stream of consciousness (SOC) and then the types of switching experiences people report. I then have a dedicated "how to learn on your own " section to help you navigate switching discussion in the wild
Also, if anyone has any questions about the guide or switching questions in general, I'm happy to answer them! However, I would prefer if you ask me through my "ask me anything" request so I have room to write a detailed response!
I groan every time I hear another story about a servitor that has "gone rogue" and ended up turning into a cobud instead. Given what I know about a servitor's limitations, as well as the unconscious biases and motivations for creating a servitor, I'll explain why this happens and how to prevent some awkward conversations both in and out of system.
Servitors "going rogue" can sound scary, but you need to look closer at the servitor's purpose and what mindsets their cocreator has about it. If the servitor is seen as an entity that carries out a task like shuffling cards and nothing more, that's unlikely to cause problems. However, one that's supposed to mimic being a headmate probably will. While servitors are inherently human because they are part of the human brain, a creator's underlying expectations and desires can lead to cobud creation instead.
Servitor limitations
Servitors aren't designed to solely handle personality-dependent tasks. They are designed to handle basic tasks or serve as a support for these tasks. But they will fall short when expected more of.
A prime example of this is the "body OS", or "body operating system". This is a basic servitor that most people likely have; it seems to come prepackaged with having a brain. Its purpose seems to be making it easier to think and go about your day-to-day activities.
While the body OS can engage in conversations, it's not designed to handle an entire conversation by itself. The body OS echos general opinions and basic conversation behaviors, but that's because it's designed to help you by offloading conscious effort in day-to-day conversations. (I may share my interesting experience with our body OS in a future post.) However, once you do need to make decisions based on your values or do thinking that requires a lot of conscious thought, the body OS falls short. I assume this because we have heard multiple stories about headmates abandoning the front, only for new ones to spawn after it's been too long. Thus, I concluded a headmate being in control must be required and the body OS isn't enough on its own.
A long time ago, I found another system's experience that supported the idea a servitor shouldn't be left alone in the front. They had a dish-washing servitor, but I may have misremembered and it was just their body OS. They have their servitor do the dishes so they can focus on each other in wonderland. However, if someone interrupts them, a headmate will be summoned to address the situation.
Summoning a headmate also happens with different servitor-like thoughtforms we have. We struggle with emotional self-awareness, so we ask these entities if we really feel a certain way or not on certain things. In response, they will spit out a short answer. However, when it comes to explaining why, they will eventually summon the part of us with those feelings instead. If they didn't, that would imply they were just part of us, and not really a separate servitor who's just passing along a message.
Overall, servitors don't seem like they can carry out personality-dependent tasks on their own. Knowing that, it makes sense why a servitor expected to do those tasks likely becomes a cobud instead.
When things go wrong
I assume there are a few underlying expectations that can lead to servitors "going rogue" and becoming disobedient. However, most of them fall under the general unconscious assumption certain "servitors" are actually separate people. There are a few stories I can think of and some of my speculations about escapism that may explain what inspires these mindsets.
One possible mindset could be the self-fulfilling prophecy that servitors could go rogue in the first place. I have heard of multiple reports of servitors going rogue, reports that it happens easily, and fears of servitors going rogue. This seems very similar to the fears authors and role players have for creating cobuds out of story characters. However, it's possible to have story characters and cobuds (like we do). Likewise, there are examples of servitors not going rogue, usually HUD-like servitors. However, fear is one of the easier expectations to identify.
I believe the main expectation for servitors going rogue is unconsciously expecting a servitor to be a person. You can create a cobud starting with a story character, so I feel basing your cobud off of a servitor isn't too different.
I'm not the first to come to this conclusion either. In response to an older system who reported their servitors having gone rogue, another paromancer suspected the servitor creator had a deep desire for a person instead of a mindless robot. A similar response was given by several paromancers to another incident I'm more familiar with.
A long time ago, I was fortunate enough to meet a system with a "servitor going rogue" situation in a public Discord server. They had a fascinating approach to servitor creation- they "programmed" them by having them follow state machine logic: "if this happens, do xyz." However, their servitors were expected to be servants while also having person-like qualities. The servitor creator explained they would scrap servitors that were deemed "too sentient" and created revisions to try and find that line between person and "machine". However, to me as well as others, it seemed pretty obvious the underlying desire for a cobud was still present.
While a lot more complicated, my host, Gray, created a "servitor" but desired a headmate instead. We saw Gray wanting to create more cobud-like thoughtforms as a problem (due to large-system stigma), and this time he wanted to make a "servitor" to serve as our "subconscious representative". Upon closer inspection, we eventually realized it wasn't a servitor- it was Stars, our headmate who went dormant and Gray brought back. (Stars is kind of servitor-like in nature though, which is part of why it's complicated.) We then realized the underlying motivation for creating some of our more recent turned-out-to-be cobud headmates was Gray wanting Stars back, but failing to do so before. We didn't create any other cobuds since, but we kept the cobuds Gray created.
On a slightly different note, I also speculate wanting someone or something else to live your life will also lead to a failure in creating a servitor. I vaguely remember some people wanting to create a servitor to do things like chores, but they never produced results. On the other hand, the system I mentioned earlier with the dish-washing servitor wasn't stressed about doing dishes, they were just bored. I feel those different mindsets going into servitor creation are significant.
However, it's possible this situation is more rare and less understood than I initially thought. Hosts who abandon the front, an already rare situation in of itself, don't usually need a servitor to take their place. Plus, my feelings of wanting cobuds to be treated like people unless told otherwise is probably making this situation seem more common to me than it really is. I will be very surprised if a system can successfully pull off creating a servitor that does stressful tasks for them. But I don't recommend it either because it would ultimately be a band-aid solution to a deeper problem.
Preventing "rogue" servitors
Ultimately, I feel the underlying biases and desires into servitorship are the driving force that lead to servitors going rogue or not. Since servitors aren't designed to handle deep conscious thinking and decision making on personal values, asking a servitor to do that is ultimately asking for a cobud instead. Being mindful of potential mental health related motuvations, accepting the possibility of more cobuds, blah blahhh
First, if you like the idea of having a servitor doing chores or act as a servant for you, think about what it would be like to have a servitor and consider the possibility you want another cobud and/or are trying to escape responsibility. Do you want to zone out and be distracted while a servitor is doing simple tasks, or do you want to avoid the task all together? If you want a "yes" person who always says yes to you, are you sure this isn't a trauma response from bad past experiences with people, and you just want someone who would genuinely want to say "yes" to you? Addressing any underlying trauma will lead to a happier experience a servitor can't offer you.
Keep in mind it's not normal to have a trauma response or a panic attack for things like cleaning and doing homework. You shouldn't have to suffer trying to force yourself to do these things. If possible, please seek professional help and/or look into self-help resources.
Second, if you want to create more than one cobud, do it. Discouraging cocreators from creating large systems doesn't usually work and creates stigma and shame. It also leads to cases like ours where systems will create "servitors", unconsciously hoping to find a loophole. There's no point in adding unnecessary restraints. Instead, it's more effective to understand why you want to create more cobuds instead and go from there.
Third, there's also no need to humanize servitors either. You can still respect a servitor that isn't intended to be a person. The servitor may need times to recharge, just like how focusing on anything for too long can be exhausting, you shouldn't lash out at a servitor doing what it was expected to do, etc. It's like respecting the body- understand the servitor's limits and don't push far beyond them.
So hopefully, next time you want to dive into servitorship, you have a clear understanding of what you want and your intentions. No one wants their cobud sharing the "So my host thought I was a lifeless robot!" story!
Because almost everyone has a beach or had a beach skit while in their wonderland. I want to make this one more accessible to beginners, so the story is pretty simple and only focuses on describing a handful of things.
You are standing on a beach near the water, facing the ocean. It's a warm sunny day, with only a handful of small, streak-like clouds in the bright blue sky. There's a cool breeze that comes and goes, making a rushing sound as it moves and carrying the smell of salt along with it. The white, fine sand beneath you is warm, but it quickly starts to cool as your body and shadow block the sun's rays. The ocean is a vibrant blue-green that only sightly shimmers in the sunlight. The tides form slowly, grumbling and growing in height until suddenly, they gently spill over and dissipate. The extra water is then pulled back in, restarting the cycle.
You move forward, the sand effortlessly shifting about. The sand in front of you is hotter, but not hot enough to burn you. You take note to avoid the sparse twigs, leaves, and broken seashells along the way.
And now, you are close to the water's edge. The gray expanse is sprinkled with broken shells, plant matter, and grit from the sea. The wet sand is cool to the touch, and it feels like it dries a bit when your weight presses down on it. The wet sand is a bit sticky, which becomes more noticeable as it accumulates. As you move forward, the wet sand gets colder, heavier, and stickier.
By now, you have reached the ocean. You stand in a tiny pool of water, only for it to flee back into the sea. As you continue forwards, you get a slight chill each time the water touches a higher part of your body. The sand beneath you is loose and gritty, but it's hard to see when the foamy water from the tides block your view. As you go deeper, the gentle nudges and pulls from the tides grow stronger, to the point you have to reorient yourself after each tide.
And then, your view is blocked by a wall of water you were not-
Suddenly you hold your breath, and you shuffle about trying to either wade or swim back. Your head finally escapes the grip of the sea and you gasp for air. When you stand again, the water only comes halfway up your body. You grow cold as the breeze brushes by your wet head and upper body.
Looking forward, you can see the beach, and the gradient from blue to brown to white. The dry sand feels a little far away, but somehow, the whole beach feels small.
You turn and face the water. Another tide rolls in, with a soft grumble, until it spills over and dissipates. The spillover reaches your body, the white foam obscuring the wet sand underneath. Looking out, the vast sea stretches onwards, meeting the sky at the horizon.
Trees are great! They're pretty, they provide shade, some flower and produce fruit, and they make a wonderland feel more livable in general. Here are some things to think about when generating one in your wonderland:
First, Bob Ross. No seriously. Watch videos on how painters and other artists paint and draw trees. Artists will explain the general shape and form of a tree while pointing out the appealing qualities of them too. Plus, focusing on the emotional vibes such as the "happy little trees" or scary horror movie trees can help you figure out what you want your trees to look like. You can also find other artists describing how they draw trees in "how to draw a tree" type videos.
Looking at taxonomy and biology information on trees can help a lot too, but it's okay if you want the basic rundown:
Pine trees (trees with hard, needle-like leaves) and deciduous trees (trees with leaves that change color and drop off in the fall) are not taxonomical categories- lots of different species of trees get lumped into these categories.
Instead, you have gymnosperms and angiosperms. These are based on if the plant doesn't have flowers and the seeds are exposed or the the plant does flower and the seeds are encased in an ovary. For example, pine trees with pine cones are a type of gymnosperm because the seeds don't have a fleshy wrapping. On the other hand, apple trees are angiosperms because their seeds are in a fleshy casing fruit.
I got that information from this chapter, you can read it here:
Trees also change based on their environment. For instance, palm trees have adapted flexible trunks so they bend in hurricane-force winds instead of snap and break. Another example is jungle canopy trees. Despite being really tall, they have incredibly shallow roots. This is because the forest floor is so nutrient rich, it's more efficient to have shallow roots than deeper ones.
Speaking of rain, did you know trees actually contribute to creating rainy weather? I was surprised too!
We first heard about it from this video. Despite being an older video, it's still true!
Thus, even if the area around a forest is drier, it probably isn't a desert! However, it really needs to be a forest since one tree would likely die in an area that's too dry. Or maybe you have a fictional wonderland tree that defies the rules of nature.
Don't forget that some trees can have some really weird quirks. Some are insanely tall or huge in general, some get very picky and die if their neediness isn't met, and some are invasive because they're hardy generalists.
Or you can have a mix- Bradford Pears are invasive, but they're also bad at being trees. They fall and break apart, causing damage and repair bills. Some trees need to be set on fire for their pinecones to open up and carry out the next generation. And some trees are very squat because tornadoes and other bad storms constantly rip off taller foliage and kill trees that are too tall.
Forests are rarely all one type of tree. Since seeds can spread over long distances, it's possible neighboring spots are already taken by different types of trees. Plus, some trees evolved to take advantage of the spotted sunlight and shade, like the dogwood tree.
And don't forget the tree litter! Trees often have a lot of stuff that fell off of them, whether it's leaves, pine needles, acorns, twigs, flower petals, and so on!
Now that you're seeded with tree knowledge, you can reach for the sun for more, and you can branch off new ideas and get your woodchucks that could chuck wood!
We heard this quote from somewhere, but we can't find the original source and we have modified it multiple times since. Here is my current retelling of it:
Cocreation is like an umbrella. If you use it as a crutch, it will break. If you use it as a tool, it can snap. When it storms, it can be ripped from your hands, leaving you soaked and aggrieved.
But when it rains, it can keep you dry.
Cocreation is not a magic fix or a solution to day-to-day problems. But it can provide warmth when you're feeling blue.
As a consequence of being cocreators, we see our trauma through cocreation-tinted glasses. In the past, we confused a lot of our trauma-related experiences with typical non trauma-related cocreation experiences. Thus, when we apply cocreation mindsets to trauma, we call it "traumamancy".
This is not to be confused with willomancy. Willomancy is a separate dedicated practice of willing headmates into existence, sometimes using an under-developed alter as a starting point. On the other hand, traumamancy is a byproduct of viewing one's trauma with a cocreator or paromancer perspective.
We are not the first system to coin the term. While we may have used it the most in broader parogenic community spaces, I spotted another system come up with the term years before I did.
As a result, we tend to think of traumamancy through a negative lens. We originally thought of the term jokingly, but our idea of "funny" here is coming from a place of dark humor and coping with our trauma-related experiences. We struggled with this confusion for awhile, and it obscured red flags for when when we needed professional help.
A few examples:
We thought hostile intrusive thoughts that were thoughtforms were just walk-ins you needed extra effort to ignore.
I always felt like the odd one out, but I assumed that was because we were just an "accidental system". Of course, I convenient forgot about this when other accidental systems showed up
We assumed my paranoia over staying switched-in was normal cocreation stuff
While general self-help advice isn't abnormal for cocreation guidance, there's a fine line between helping someone create a cobud or how to visualize vs say helping someone cope with incredibly problematic intrusive thoughts or help someone process extreme headmate on headmate tensions.
Additionally, we often find the confusion between cocreation and trauma-related experiences frustrating when giving advice to others. We are not therapists, we can't be expected to give advice beyond typical self-help tips. And even then, it's frustrating when we want to talk about cocreation. We're not always in the mood to give depression and anxiety support.
However, traumamancy does have a few positives.
For one, it can make coping during trauma work easier. We find our trauma work incredibly fascinating. We think it's fun to analyze why our alters are the way they are and how our mind uses plurality in interesting ways.
Secondly, it gives us experiences we can apply to cocreation. We have an ongoing conversation on the difference between median and another separate person too given our trauma parts. Thus, I can turn around and use that knowledge to help others understand medianship in general. We also have "the gate story". Stars, our headmate, building a symbolic gate to prevent us from abusing parallel processing. And then much later, it thwarted an alter trying to escape to parallel space. That experience gives us a several insights on what parallel processing is and how it works.
Cocreation at it's core is about getting a deeper understanding of your mind and testing the limits of it. Traumamancy delivers on that front, even though its baggage kind of sucks.
