multiples and otherkin (x-posted)

[morgil-lomion.livejournal.com]

Well, I think this is my first official update in this community but I think most people are familiar with me. If not, I'll briefly introduce myself. I'm an outside walk-in to a system of several different people living inside one body/mind. I call myself an Angel of Death and believe myself to be over 700 years old [although I admit even I am skeptical to my own claims; I don't even take my own memories as absolute evidence of the truth of my claims e.g. I may be crazy :)].

That being said and all of this beingg taken into consideration, I find myself interested in the interactions between multiplicity(be it natural or disordered) and otherkinism(to coin a word).

It seems to me that there are many commonalities between the two phenomena and, while different in many ways, Kin seem to often share some traits with Multiples and vice versa. At the same time, the interactions and reactions between persons who consider themselves only to be one or the other are not always necessarily amiable. Some Kin think of Multiples as "crazies" and some Multiples seem to do the reverse; at very least there seems to be a good deal of skepticism as a subtext for their interactions with one another.

There also exist subtle differences in the language used between the two groups when it comes to terms and ideas that are at least superficially nearly identical.

Take the concept of a "walk-in", a term I use to describe myself to aid other people's understanding of me. Whereas Kin often use this term in a highly mystical and transendental fassion roughly similar to the old idea of someone either possesing or being possesed by a spirit(not necessarily evil although possesion certainly has that connotation culturally for many), Multiples tend to think of it as a common or a more internal experience where another person simply walks into the mind and takes up residence there.

Because of these observations, I am curious as to other people in both communities perspectives on each other and people's unique personal observations or general experiences with these ideas.

I find both groups of people and their interactions fascinating, largely of course because I consider myself both, and also because of the blurred line that marginally seperates people in both categories.

I look forward to the reactions and impressions of the people who respond, be they experienced in these interactions or completely uninformed of the paradigmatical juxtaposition these two groups usually fall into. Id est: Both the experienced and the newbie I'm sure will have interesting things to say.

Discussion in otherkin.

Comments

Re: I agree with you somewhat,

[morgil-lomion.livejournal.com]

So, to take a stab at what you are saying here... You managed to either understand or speak a language foreign to you without realizing it because of whatever reasons one might think caused it, in your case you say being psychic.

Sorry if that's incorrect but I wasn't quite sure I understood your meaning.

As for the last bit, is it possible for you to tell me where these studies are taking place or provide reference for the curious despite its state of completetion? And no, it shouldn't be an offensive statement, people should be willing to back up any claim with evidence. Especially of paranormal ability.

Re: I agree with you somewhat,

[spookshow-girl.livejournal.com]

Actually, the closest I come to an unexplained knowledge of a language, if I were to attempt to ascribe it to anything, could probably be attributed to cultural memory, spurious as that is.

I was talking about a hypothetical circumstance, and hypothetical explainations.

I'd need to find it again, we can look, I think she had found the link.

It basically involved people meditating on or visualizing certain physical activities, while others practiced more conventionally. The results indicated the meditators were not as far behind as expected. This is a much different statement than dead even however, and i'm very hesitant to make that declaration.

--Me/Her

Re: I agree with you somewhat,

[ksol1460.livejournal.com]

This was the case with a friend& of ours. At a relatively young age, they had a unit on archery in gym class, and were able immediately to demonstrate a relatively high level of skill. They generally did not do well in most athletics (although they were champion distance swimmers).

Unknown to anyone else, the group had learnt archery in the Scouts a year or two before, so had a grounding in the basics. One of them had taken this knowledge back to his own world and constantly practiced. So while the rest of the gym class were still trying to figure out how to get the arrow onto the string, this gentleman came forward and hit bull's eye after bull's eye without even seeming to half try.

A mental practice effect definitely exists. We saw a piece on television about Olympic figure skaters who are taught "guided imagery" simply to familiarize themselves with running through their routines mentally, accompanied by the music they planned to use. I believe the woman interviewed said she felt this helped her by about 10%-15%, but that since she also did plenty of physical, earth world practice, she couldn't really judge how much the mental runthroughs helped overall, only that they did.