Questions about how multiples work.

[distanteyes.livejournal.com]

Disclaimer: Opinions and confusion points of separate splits in here do not reflect on the opinions held by all. - W***

We have been wondering about these for a while, but did not have anyone we could ask. Any input or opinions are welcome. I understand how multiples work; I just get confused when it doesn’t follow standard definitions. It makes me wonder if I am just being delusional. - L**

Do all multiples hear voices in their heads? We were wondering about this. We almost never ‘hear’ anything. We tend to just switch and often know what everyone else is thinking, but not because we had a conversation, but because we just know. Do you have to hear voices in your head if you are a multiple? What does it mean if you do or don’t? - L**

Does anyone have somebody in their head that is in denial about them being a multiple? For example explaining shifts and alters as attention getting devices caused by sleep deprivation. We have never been abused in a ‘conventional’ manner when we where little, so she says we have no reason to be a multiple. This person in my head is very logical. What are logical reasons to prove that theory wrong? - W***

Does anyone else have splits that do not front and will hide if looked for? Why does this happen? What does this mean? Does it mean that we have hidden parts that are likely to do something evil at the worst possible time? - L**

Is there such a thing as a multiple that will not randomly lash out and hurt people that are close to them? - A****

Compiled by W***

Comments

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

"Do all multiples hear voices in their heads?" Ummm... well, for me, all three of us can 'hear' one another 'speak' without any involvement with the body's ears or vocal chords. It's not that there's some person "hearing voices in her head"; it's that all of us live here together. Realtime memory (i.e. everything that happens to or is done by the body) is fully shared; private thoughts and memories are private unless purposely communicated.

"We have never been abused in a ‘conventional’ manner when we where little, so she says we have no reason to be a multiple." Why is "a reason" necessary? This body was never abused as a small child, and I/we were "switchy" even in toddlerhood. Apparently a lot of people are naturally multiple. It's even conceivable that the people who supposedly become multiple because of abuse would have been just as multiple if they had not been abused.

"Does anyone else have splits that do not front and will hide if looked for?" I have to tell you, "splits" is a derogatory term. I have no "splits". I do have two 'brothers' who share this body with me, and have on occasion had 'guests'. One of my 'brothers' has issues about corporeality, though he's been working on them - it's hard for him to get past his awareness that this body is so different from his own, and he is particularly squicked by its femaleness, so he is generally reluctant to take form. He has occasional bouts of severe brooding, and sometimes cold rages wherein he would very much like to hurt people, but he doesn't act on them, and is ashamed afterwards for having wanted to. On his bad days he believes himself to be evil; no one who knows him believes it.

His twin loves being corporeal, and takes the helm for part of every day, but has communication issues (which he is also working on) so he usually only "fronts" when he won't have to deal with people. He has sometimes done dangerous things either on impulse or because he didn't realize they were dangerous, but he has never harmed anyone else or acted with hurtful intentions, and the only person he ever really gets mad at is his twin.

Have had a few seriously unstable 'guests' over the years, and one notable one who was both extremely powerful and basically amoral, who stayed for nine years and caused a whole lot of chaos. That whole experience turned out to be both positive and necessary in the long run, but it sure wasn't much fun (except sometimes for her, I guess) at the time: a prime example of what happens when you call up that which you cannot put down. I wouldn't call her "evil", though... she is/was very complex. She wasn't "hidden" either - ha, far from.

I'm the one who "fronts" when there are people to be dealt with, and I don't randomly lash out at them. I would say I am pretty clear and polite in letting people know where my boundaries are, and if a person repeatedly trespasses, I'd generally rather put up better fences than blast them with the shotgun, as it were. I don't intentionally trespass on others' boundaries - sometimes it's not clear where they are, but if I'm told I have done so, I back off and don't do it again. If I lash out at someone, it is definitely not "randomly" - it's because they have chosen to ignore my clear warnings and attempts to avoid or limit contact with them.

[distanteyes.livejournal.com]

I have to tell you, "splits" is a derogatory term.

I’m sorry I did not realize this. I was using this term to mean alter, walking, or analog. I did not realize it was offensive. I suppose I can see how it is. I’ll try to alter my typing pattern. I apologize in advance if I slip. - W***

Re:

[sexylittleone.livejournal.com]

While I respect Elens' right to being offended or Her opinion on this there are those of Us here who are "splits". Our system is one such. just fyi. shrugs. Doens't matter why the point being not everyone will be offended but ifyou wish to err on the side of conservatism refrain from using that word.

El *waves to Elenbarathi* :P

Re:

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

*grins and waves back*

Well, actually my 'brothers' may be "splits" of one another - there is some evidence to suggest that - but if they are, then the splitting apparently took place in some different life/world/whatever. There's no way to tell, and it's pretty much moot anyway - whatever they once may have been, they're two separate people now.

I don't deny the fact that multiplicity sometimes happens by means of splitting, but I do think "split" is a derogatory term. Notice that people don't commonly call themselves "splits", even though logically, if one half of a pair is a "split", the other must be one too.

Re:

[shadowechoes.livejournal.com]

*agrees about splits* Technically, some of Us are splits, meaning We split from someone else in the system. But it doesn't mean We aren't real people too. ;) We used to use "split" and "alter" when We were new the idea, and didn't exactly have a healthy, functioning perspective on being multiple. We prefer to be called system members or people, because regardless of where We came from or how We came to be, We are people. :)
~Kay

Re:

[ksol1460.livejournal.com]

Yeah some split but many did not. A lot of multiples don't like the term "alters" either and prefer "people". In a situation where we're not sure how the multiples we're talking to view themselves, we say people and we assume they are not the product of one mind splitting itself. We let them tell us one way or the other.