Greetings to all.

[divine-sinners.livejournal.com]

I have never heard the term "multiplicity" until a week ago when by chance I happened upon this site. It interested me greatly, so I read through a bit of the posts... and this is what I am. Of course, I never knew there were others out there like me and Niz just claimed it to be schitzophrenia and left it at that. But I never refer to me and Niz collectively as "we" when I speak, because we speak seperately, not as one. Bear with me however, as I don't know the meanings of all these terms yet (systems? littles?) and hopefully both of us will learn something more about ourselves from this place. If you could refer me to any informational websites on the topic, t'would be much appreciated. :)

Afiel

Comments

[ninalyn.livejournal.com]

http://astraeasweb.net/plural/

That's a great site to get started on non-disordered multiplicity.

Welcome! :)

-Juliana of WhisperSung

[divine-sinners.livejournal.com]

Thank you ^_^ May I ask what "non-disordered" multiplicity is?

Welcome!

[ksol1460.livejournal.com]

Also,
http://www.karitas.net/blackbirds/layman
http://www.dreamshore.net/amorpha/

"But I never refer to me and Niz collectively as "we" when I speak, because we speak seperately, not as one."

For a lot of groups (ourselves included) the "we" is like that in your "we speak separately, not as one".

A group of persons living in one body is often referred to as a system -- also as a clan, house (or household), colony, collective, etc. Whatever works. Some people use the word system to refer to the operating system by which a group lives, just how they generally run things.

(and for the record, we never refer to our children as littles. ;) )

Hope this helps to clear things up. Please feel free to ask questions.

Usage of the term "We"

[spookshow-girl.livejournal.com]

Sometimes it's to our advantage to present a semi-unified front, which is distinct from presenting as a single.

For example, if all object to an activity, and one of us makes it clear, it may be presumed by other parties that others may not be so bothered. Statements like "We find this unacceptable," with a heavy emphasis on we, makes it less likely people will waste their time looking for a loophole that isn't there.

It is of course, not the only way to handle that sort of behavior. Sometimes it's better to just let the other party keep hitting the wall. It certainly has an amusement factor.

Another odd circumstance in which we'll use we, is when cofronting, and one of us gets an idea, and the other enacts it, regardless of whether or not it's something they'd normally do. CF: good/bad influence. When that occurs, it's just easier for us to take collective responsibility/credit, than to explain to others exactly how it happened.

CF: lazy

Other times, it essentially amounts to being lazy and attempting to express that all parties within the system have engaged in an activity, without getting into specifics. ;) This is shown in the previous paragraph.

This is however, not policy, just observed tendencies. What terms are actually used can depend on everything from mood, to willingness of people around me get a full explination, rather than immediately attempting to figure out who to lecture about the broken window.

In general, we try to be concious of when the term "we" is used, and try to be careful about not using it to the extent that people don't acknowledge individuality.

I have also been known to use the term often with regards to people outside the body.

If I say, for example, that "We weren't raised like that", "we" may mean:
1. The system
2. My sisters
3. My family, extending up a few generations
3. My friends and I that share a common enough upbringing
4. People from my old neighborhoods
5. People of my ethnic heritage, and sociological background

I don't know if this is considered odd, but people will respond as though it is sometimes. To me, nosotros, the spanish word for "Us/we", has a connotation of comraderie, which I think I extend to the english usage.

At the same time, I don't like being included in other people's groupings haphazardly.

Even through all this, I don't like using the term "we" in such a way as to invalidate the individuality of system members, which usage of the term can have a nasty habit of doing.

--Me

Re: Usage of the term "We"

[ksol1460.livejournal.com]

No, it doesn't sound odd at all. I was going to try to go into some of that in my post but I was too tired to think that clearly. Had to get more sleep.

The part you mentioned that I was going to bring out is that when any group of people live together, whether it's a family or a group of friends or what, they form a small personal culture. So they might think of "we" in that context, and then it might be a question of doing things together ("we like to go to the laundrette on Fridays") or like you said it could be speaking about beliefs held in common "we approve / don't approve of" something.

A lot of times we tend to use we for something the body has to do and it doesn't matter who does it. e.g. "We drove sethrenn to school this morning." When you talk about being lazy, that's what we think of.

A lot of multiple systems think of this culture idea in a conscious way, especially gateway systems, but not just them. They have a bond with each other, even if they don't always get along. So there's that kind of we, too.

Re: Welcome!

[divine-sinners.livejournal.com]

Thanks for clearing that up. I was think that we meant all people in one body speaking together... sometimes Niz and I refer to ourselves as "we" when speaking of things we do together or things we both agree on.

[delancy.livejournal.com]

I just wanted you to know I have added you to my friends list; you seem like an interesting person.

[divine-sinners.livejournal.com]

Thanks. I'll add you as well :)

[shadowechoes.livejournal.com]

Hello and welcome
~Jassa