#mod quill

[evilxdoodles]

true evil comes from being evil just for the joy and whimsy of it

[sysmedsaresexist]

what are your thoughts on the community theory that autism may cause more fictives?

I come to you, anon, a broken man. I am in shambles. My life has been ripped apart.

I just spent a straight hour writing a response. It was a beautiful response, with sources, and pretty colors, and oh, about 2k words.

And it's all gone.

BUT!!! I, Quill, am not one to be discouraged. I'm going to redo this. FROM THE TOP!!!! (and now saving draft every 5 seconds istg-)

TL;DR: I really genuinely love the theory and think it has a lot of merit. However, I also really disagree with how some parts of the community handle this theory, and the stereotypes of autistic systems that come from it.

Alright. Mod Quill here, yes, I am an autistic system, currently a bit itchy inside because I should've been almost done this post and nearly into my latest fixation (don't starve together), and instead I'm rewriting this all and delaying my gratification. I am being so strong and brave right now.

[EDIT, before I actually get started, now that I'm done my ramble: in the following essay, I discuss introjection as a whole, rather than just fictives. I personally only have fictional introjects, but we all absolutely despise the term fictive being used on our system, so we avoided the term.]

Let's start with the fact that introjection is incredibly normal. My GOAT, Piaget, discusses at length how schema develops, and that's based a lot in introjection. Introjection, as a concept, is the idea that we, as people, unconsciously take on the beliefs, personality traits, sometimes even emotions of those around us. This can be for a lot of reasons.

Introjection (Defense Mechanism) was an interesting article I found discussing this idea, especially as it discusses introjection VS internalization, identification, and incorporation. Basically, when y'all try to find good articles online about introjection, those other words are usually fair game as well. This article is largely setting out to define various types of introjection. It describes normal introjection (bringing up Piaget, love that guy, he's my main man as a teacher) and brings up how introjects (i.e. the emotions/traits/beliefs/etc) can be distorted via fantasy. When that happens, it's considered secondary identification, and (she cites Freud here but I am not going digging more for MORE research atm), "Such secondary identification aims to reduce feelings of separation and hostility, and increase feelings of closeness, between the self and the external object, and thus it is regarded as a defense mechanism." So, in basic terms, introjection as a coping mechanism is often meant to reduce separation and increase closeness between an individual and the object of their introjection.

This can be seen very readily in CDDs. For instance, a hypothetical child is seeking more secure attachment with an abusive parental figure; they then form a dissociative part that is literally that abusive parental figure, making that person a part of them. This is a highly pathological defense mechanism.

So where does autism come in? Well... It's a disorder featuring:

A constant feeling of loneliness or ostracization for many individuals (discussed here)

A feeling of requirement for masking or mimicry of others in order to fit in (discussed here)

Diagnostic criteria that clearly show an inability to connect with others, rigid thinking patterns (akin to a fixed-mindset, just musing here), and an inability to maintain healthy relationships.

So... autistic CDD systems would then be individuals with a dissociative disorder, who (due to their autism) often report feeling more disconnected with themselves than their peers, who already rely on imitation as a conscious form of survival in an attempt to achieve closeness...

So you mean to say, Autistic CDD Systems Introject More???? HUH.

It's spelled out right there. It's fairly blatantly obvious. And genuinely, I don't think anyone was really doubting this. I don't think anyone is really out here saying that autistic people don't experience significant dissociation/introjection.

However, there's a lot of people recently shouting to the hilltops that there's no proof that autistic systems experience higher amounts of introject alters. And...

Duh? Obviously? There's already a significant lack of research into introjects in CDD systems. Why on earth would they then skip forward to research into introjects in autistic CDD systems? The medical world isn't going to skip around like that -- particularly, well... because why would they even research this to begin with?

Genuinely, I think that's my frustration with the recent discourse about this topic. There really is no reason, in my eyes, why the medical world should focus on this topic. What benefit would it have for patients? Introjects are simply another form of alter, same as any other. I suppose, potentially, it could lead to more ideas on how to help autistic CDD systems with their introjects in particular, but... is it that much different than just treating autistic CDD systems as a whole?

There's really no reason to be so up in arms about this idea. You're not going to be getting proof that this theorized correlation is actually scientifically valid; that's just not going to be happening anytime soon, unless someone has a really invested interest in autistic CDD introjects.

However...

HOWEVER!!!!!

That also does not mean I necessarily agree that every autistic system is like this. Because, for instance, I am not like this.

If you don't know, hi, I'm Quill, a mixed-origin CDD system featuring 15 parts. The origins aren't really important to this conversation, but we like to use accurate labels. We have 4 introjects, all of whom are fictional in nature. One is very close to source, one is so separated we forget she's an introject, and the other two are somewhere in the middle. And, despite what most people would assume, as I am a level 2 autistic individual as well as a system...

Only one of those introjects is from a hyperfixation of ours -- one that was brief, lasting only about 2 days, and that has never caught me up again -- and she's the one who immediately source separated.

Now, I am someone who struggles with hyperfixations. I scream internally while I autistically click the next 5 hour FNAF marathon when I'm supposed to be grading. I know so much lore. But yet, despite the sheer number -- undertale, MLP, FNAF, Petscop, most recently DST -- I haven't split introjects from any of those fixations.

And, well, that makes sense. Because introjection isn't just about attachment to an object. It's about taking something you need from that object. And it's unconscious in most cases.

(Semantically, I suppose that means that introject isn't really the best term for created parts who are fictional in nature, but I do not care about semantics all that much when it comes to people's self-identified labels in a minority group).

So, in the cases of my introjects:

At a time when we felt incapable, angry, and confused, we split a confident, strong, and (healthily) angry part.

At a time when we felt we were at risk of losing everyone and everything because we couldn't keep them happy, we split a character who found her lost loved ones and kept everyone happy.

At a time when we felt we needed distance from our conflicting emotions, we split someone who canonically has never been conflicted.

At a time when we were in desperate need of love, we split someone we knew would seek that love out without fail.

It wasn't based on our hyperfixations; it was based on our needs.

I think that large swaths of the system community online forgets that CDDs are borne of childhood trauma. Splits in CDD systems are caused by trauma-responses* -- you're stressed out, so your brain puts what you need to handle that stress (such as the memory of the event, the feelings you need to handle it, the personality traits that would be helpful) into a new part. In the case of introjection, a CDD brain is still doing that -- it just relies on a blueprint provided by the world around them. In the cause of autistic systems, I think they find it especially easy to rely on those blueprints.

I mean, autism comes with its own difficulties with personhood, dissociation, and lack of feeling like oneself. There's evidence to indicate that, rather than an autobiographical sense of self based on seamless memories, autistic individuals lean toward a patchwork sense of self. Extend that to CDD systemhood, an inherently dissociative, traumatic experience that comes with memory problems that further prevent autobiographical self memory, and you've got a compelling reason why introjecting whole characters (with themes and narratives that fit the experiences trying to be integrated) might be more common in autistic systems.

And... all of that -- all of the nuance, all of the discussion of trauma and the inherent struggles of being autistic -- somehow has been boiled down repeatedly, on both sides of the argument, to "Autistic systems split more introjects because they hyperfixate."

This idea led to me feeling completely isolated in system communities. I found myself in groups with the following (incredibly limited) views on autism and systemhood:

Introjects are not more common with autism at all, and anyone saying so is spreading misinformation.

Introjects only split due to traumatic experiences, and autistic people experience more trauma than others, so they split more introjects.

Introjects split more frequently in autistic systems due to hyperfixations, so if you're really autistic, you have more introjects.

And... none of these are right. All of them lack nuance, and all of them patently ignore the facts about trauma and how it impacts the brain in CDDs.

Based on the community experiences I've seen, there is a blatant correlation between autism and introjects. To ignore that correlation is to be blind to the community entirely. However, to say the correlation is only due to hyperfixation is to ignore many, many other possible reasons why autistic systems split more introjects -- of which my post only addressed some potential reasons -- and, in doing so, isolates many systems. It also stereotypes autism to hyperfixation, which is only one of the thousands of potential sprinkles on someones autism sundae, and leaves some individuals (such as myself) feeling even further isolated.

(And to suggest that it is because autistic people experience "more trauma" than others is to begin the 2025 Trauma Olypmics, and I refuse to entertain a torch bearer for those particular games.)

I understand where many individuals are coming from when they express frustration over the theory; I've been in that exact position myself, demanding proof of the correlation due to my own isolation from the community. And, with a disorder that already, inherently, feels so isolating already, on top of another disorder with its own share of isolating feelings...

I just desperately hope that people can be open to others experiences. I think it's entirely possible that someone attaches so firmly to a hyperfixation that they split a new part from it. I also think the theory I presented here -- that autistic individuals introject more readily due to a propensity for introjection in part borne of trauma -- is also entirely possible. I think there's thousands of possible explanations, and I think there's thousands of "right answers."

And I also think that none of this matters beyond a simple intellectual curiosity, and coming to understand myself more. I wrote all of this up due to my passion for the subject. I am autistic, and I want to be seen, and heard, and I want people to understand it more. I want people to broaden their perspectives and maybe see someone else's shoes, even if they aren't comfortable wearing them yet.

If another system is like mine, yay! If another system is unlike mine, yay! Regardless, every system is unique -- just like how every representation of autism is unique. And I think we should find beauty in the theories that present themselves, and enjoy the ideas more than the outcomes.

Fun additional reading that came up in the process of my buzzing about this for multiple hours:

Experiencing Self and Others: Contributions From Studies of Autism to The Psychoanalytic Theory of Social Development -> According to a friend (paraphrasing a tiny bit), "the abstract, in my reading, is basically saying that comparing autistic and non-autistic kids can help us understand more about how theory of mind and mental modeling of others can develop, particularly in relevancy to concepts of internalization/introjection." They did read through the whole article (while also warning me to never use scihub) and indicated for me that this really doesn't discuss autism in correlation to introjection, and even seems to suggest that autistic people can't introject (in the non-pathological sense) due to their inability to connect to others. (I genuinely think this is in direct opposition to the first study I mentioned, about how introjection is a defense mechanism, especially as autistic people experience significant amounts of trauma due to their disorder anyways.)

Making the thought thinkable: On introjection and projection -> Can only access the first page, which discusses a bit about echlalia and inner worlds. However, the title makes me curious about what this could offer in terms of the Autistic System Introjects Debate(tm). I want to go digging a bit more to see if I can get around the paywalls on this. This is a complete wild card to me.

Whose memories are they and where do they go? Problems surrounding internalization in children on the autistic spectrum -> A very interesting article that came up while my friend was reading the Experiencing Self article. Again, I cannot access anything but the abstract myself (fucking pAYWALLS) but it's promising. Here's a quote: "The author suggests that, instead of internalizing shared experiences leading to growth, children with autism can feel that they add to themselves by taking over the qualities of others through the ‘annexation’ of physical properties that leads to a damaged object and can trigger a particular sort of negative therapeutic reaction." (Emphasis mine) Friend suggests full article is a goldmine. I'll leave that for you all to go digging for, if you'd like to know more.

(*Footnote: I mean splitting in the most basic, CDD medical understanding of the disorder way possible. Obviously, as a mixed-origin system, I understand there's more than one way to split a part than simply through traumatic/stressful experiences.)

[skrizzleman]

[60] Don't let him fool you, he will steal your shiny things if left unsupervised

[anon-mythicquest-confessions]

Carl Waldemar Longbottom lives in my head rent-free. Ever since “Backstory!” I now simultaneously see him as every age he has ever been and is this what they mean by “glimpse through the veil of time”? Anyways I wanna be his friend and hear all of his wildly inappropriate stories because it sounds like fun.

.

[daily-davenport]

Today’s Davenport is taking names.

[Image description start. A colored drawing of Davenport who is a tanned gnome with long pulled back red hair with a mustache and goatee. He is wearing a red tricorn pirate hat with a big white feather. He has two gold earrings in his left ear and has a white collar shirt with dark brown pants and a red cloth wrapped around his waist. Davenport’s right hand is holding his hat. His left hand is making a gesture with his fist closed but thumb out and sliding it across his neck. He has a huge grin on his face. End description.]

[reversedreamtale]

Buff Mods

so..uh...yeah...i did a thing...

@somebodyalreadytookthis2​

i hope you two are happy.

you two run my absolute favorite blog on here and im literally addicted to tumblr bc of what you mods post. so thank you. ^w^

ThatDorkyDork

[evilxdoodles]

get erased idiot

[sysmedsaresexist]

so here's our thing, as a traumagenic system, right. for the longest time we thought we *couldn't* be plural because we "were not traumatized" and we only ever heard about DID-style, traumatized-at-5 systems. thing is, our trauma was just under lock and key of a lot of trauma-locked memories. we're completely pro-endo, because relying on diagnostic criteria helps *no one.*

Hey, Mod Quill here.

For a very, very long time, I was convinced I had DID without trauma. I was firmly pro-endo because I didn't have any trauma, so the DID community didn't welcome me. I wasn't like those other systems; I didn't have trauma, I wasn't upset, I never remembered fighting with my parts! Moreover, the endogenic community welcomed me with open arms, telling me over, and over... and over... and over... just how not traumatized I was.

Even after I started to realize I was in an active abuse situation. Even after I started noticing my symptoms more and more. Even after anti-endos had patiently and kindly (I know, insane to think about) explained that I likely just didn't remember my trauma before, and that what I described as clear and blatant symptoms were equally clear and blatant trauma responses.

I was, essentially, kicked out of pro-endo communities, way back when, because I was too traumatized, and too confrontational when people told me all the reasons I couldn't be traumatized -- such as "too rich," "too white," and "but your parents loved you." That last one was almost constant.

And you know what's remarkable?

Trauma is not part of the diagnostic criteria for DID. Is it a requirement? Yes! But it IS NOT part of the criteria.

You know what is?

Alteration of identity, causing marked issues with sense of self, and affecting many aspects of life (like social relationships, cognition, agency, etc)

Amnesia in some regard (inconsistent with normal forgetfulness)

Distress OR Dysfunction (and thank FUCK Mod Dude explained what dysfunction means, if it's hurdles in your path that you've learned to get over, guess what, neurotypicals don't have those at all)

I experienced all of these. Therefore, I have DID.

And therefore, controversially, many endogenic systems have DID. By the diagnostic criteria. If they experience these three things, that's disordered, babey! It doesn't fucking matter what their trauma history is.

The thing is, I have not known any systems personally who do have these things... without also having trauma. And that's because of many, many different things, but the fact of the matter is, in DID, the alters are a trauma response, not just an additional "thing that normally happens" to systems. And I say this as a DID system with mixed-origins.

Knowing this diagnostic criteria helped me so much. It helped me get the help I fucking needed. It helped me understand the hell was happening to me, and why it was so much worse around my (what I later learned were) abusers.

I'm sorry to say this, but comments like yours are one of many, many reasons why I'm no longer comfortable using pro-endo as a label. Too often, in the effort to support endogenic systems, DID systems and what is helpful for many of us gets... discarded. And that's not right.

I'm not saying what you went through was right either. And it sucks that you couldn't find anyone to relate to, or who could give you the proper information you needed. But the fact is, the diagnostic criteria of the DSM-5 is not to blame for that, and saying it "helps no one" is offensive to those of us who would have died without a diagnosis.

The thing to blame for not having the proper information is people spreading misinfo about DID, people spreading misinfo about systemhood in general, and a lack of role models within the community as it is.

We, as systems, need to be more and more vocal about different presentations of systemhood -- especially since the concept of systemhood is now kind of getting more and more public eye on it. And at the end of the day, it doesn't fucking matter if people are traumatized or not! It doesn't matter if people are pro-endo, anti-endo, or not fucking with syscourse. It doesn't matter if people are diagnosed, self-diagnosed, medically recognized, or not fucking with labels. It doesn't matter if someone is ACTUALLY a system or not!

What matters is getting the help we need. What matters is people getting the diagnosis they need, if that's even something they need. What matters is seeing people with life-long trauma disorders learn to thrive and heal and recover, regardless of what recovery might be for them.

Pro-endo doesn't mean discarding the DSM. Or at least, I highly doubt those who use that label mean it that way. And maybe you didn't either, and I'm sorry to have gone off so long. It's just...

I've seen too much anti-medicalism from pro-endos to trust it anymore, especially as someone who has had to deal with... a lot of ableism about my origins.

Good luck out there -- and I hope you get what you need as well. I hope we all do.