Sexuality VS dual gender

[thecuteone33.livejournal.com]

Hiya -- I just posted something else about writing.  I'm kinda new to this community (not new to LJ -- just been inactive for a long time).  I've read a couple of threads/postings under the gender/sexuality topics. I'm not sure where I fit into all of this -- maybe I'm being a bit too label conscious.

I'm actually female -- "Carrie" I guess I'm the host -- is pretty happy with the parts I have. When I was young -- I started puberty early -- and I really had a hard time grasping gender roles/sexuality. Most of my alters were boys -- straight boys initially. I think that gender identity and sexuality was a fused concept for me then.  Girls weren't supposed to like girls and I hated having to wear a bra when i was 8, etc... I never liked being "Barbie" i wanted to always play "Ken" because I pictured myself with a Barbie.  As I had gotten older -- approaching my 20's -- my male alters started to become more bisexual/gay but I came out as a bisexual woman (yes in college hate to perpetuate the stereotype).  I still have a lot of issues with men but I still identify as bisexual -- and my male alters tend to be more gay in identity but more straight in action.  Does this make any sense??

I wonder if most people with DID/MPD have more of a fluid sexuality?  Does having different gendered alters is a factor?  Does trauma (sexual abuse) play a part as well?  What about Gender identity?  Does that get mixed up with sexual identity?  Love to hear feedback about this.

--Carrie--

Comments

Re: Not sure about the terminology...

[ksol1460.livejournal.com]

The current psychiatric view, more or less, is that DID is a mistaken belief that several minds coexist in one body, and that this ideation forms as a defense mechanism in response to childhood trauma. I understand that some people actually experience dissociative identity disorder, but it is not at all the same as simply being multiple. Dissociation, flashbacks, or blanking out of traumatic events, as in PTSD, do not appear to be an intrinsic part of multiplicity, going by our and others' experiences.

As far as I know, a fugue state is a type of memory lapse where one typically wakes up in an unfamiliar place, having lost several hours' to several months' worth of time, e.g., Ansel Bourne.

Re: Not sure about the terminology...

[thecuteone33.livejournal.com]

Well I know I've had traumatic events in my childhood (I have no memory of but I know these things did in fact happen)... But it might be more "chicken or the egg" theory -- I think I was multiple before trauma stepped into the foray.

I do know that very often I can't process things that happen -- emotionally - it's hard to describe -- I dunno if I could describe it as being in a movie -- just can't process it -- takes me a day or so. I'm sure that's a form of disassociation -- have no idea what that's called.

But I don't - or haven't in the past two decades lose time while an alter is fronting. I've actually two experiences of losing time -- pretty short -- no longer than an hour.

So I dunno what the label would be...I hate living outside the box sometimes...

Re: Not sure about the terminology...

[ksol1460.livejournal.com]

Why even bother with a label? And are they alters or persons?

Re: Not sure about the terminology...

[thecuteone33.livejournal.com]

What's the difference between alters vs persons?...

(then I can give you my answer)

Re: Not sure about the terminology...

[ksol1460.livejournal.com]

Alter is the word generally used by mental health professionals to describe the members of a multiple system, in an MPD or DID context (since non-disordered multiplicity isn't officially recognised). Generally, although there are exceptions, the predominant view as we understand it is that alters are compartmentalized emotions, ego or feeling states, and/or memories which have been personified. They are not seen as independent people in their own right but as parts or pieces of a single person. (More at http://www.astraeasweb.net/plural/issd-tgl-2005.txt)

Some groups, including members of this community, perceive themselves as consisting of one main person with a number of subsidiary alters, and they call them that (some also say "parts"). Others experience coexisting with a number of independent, individual persons.

If you feel that the people with whom you converse, etc., are not people but aspects or alters, then by all means call them that (and remember that they may see things differently).

Many community members, ourselves included, do not view their multiplicity in terms of the above psychiatric definitions. If these definitions work for you, use them; if not, you need not constrain yourself to them.