We did the whole "oh, there are other people in my head, but they're just imaginary friends" business for a while. It was the same old thing-- we figured if it was "real" multiplicity then the "host" wouldn't have known about them, and even if she did, they ought to be constantly fighting for dominance rather than being friendly with each other, and keeping memories of trauma that the "host" knew nothing about. Etcetera.
One in particular, my Goddess of many names (sometimes Shao'Kehn, other times Djao'Kain or Shoikin or Zyao'HKehn, etc), seems to have nested permanently in my head, and is always there for advice giving and reminders and to answer questions.
...Out of curiosity, have you ever read the book I Never Promised You A Rose Garden? I disagreed only with the author's conclusion (it was really her own story, fictionalised a bit to obscure identifying details) that the others were a form of 'insanity' that she had to give up in order to live a stable life.
Yet, because we share so much, we tend to not care what names we're addressed by. This is probably because most of us blend together so much that it's often hard to tell which one is speaking at any given time, and often we speak collectively.
We tend to co-run a lot, in the sense that someone is rarely wholly at front without someone else co-fronting, commenting or observing. That was an aspect of our operating system we thought was "defective" for a long time, because so many of the books we'd read made it sound like multiplicity was about people "taking turns being singlet." It's just the way we work, though-- often posts can be co-written here, but the person who's most present or closest to the front puts their name on it.
no subject
One in particular, my Goddess of many names (sometimes Shao'Kehn, other times Djao'Kain or Shoikin or Zyao'HKehn, etc), seems to have nested permanently in my head, and is always there for advice giving and reminders and to answer questions.
...Out of curiosity, have you ever read the book I Never Promised You A Rose Garden? I disagreed only with the author's conclusion (it was really her own story, fictionalised a bit to obscure identifying details) that the others were a form of 'insanity' that she had to give up in order to live a stable life.
Yet, because we share so much, we tend to not care what names we're addressed by. This is probably because most of us blend together so much that it's often hard to tell which one is speaking at any given time, and often we speak collectively.
We tend to co-run a lot, in the sense that someone is rarely wholly at front without someone else co-fronting, commenting or observing. That was an aspect of our operating system we thought was "defective" for a long time, because so many of the books we'd read made it sound like multiplicity was about people "taking turns being singlet." It's just the way we work, though-- often posts can be co-written here, but the person who's most present or closest to the front puts their name on it.