this is confusing
Feb. 20th, 2004 01:18 pm![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
chinrest.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
multiplicity_archivesWe joined this community to talk about being multi. Instead we find it's just one big argument about the definition and cause of multiplicity. We dont want to argue the existence of us alters, nor do we want to defend ourselves. Should we just leave this community?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-02-19 10:54 pm (UTC)I am a member of a fairly elaborate multiple system. Today I saw the therapist. The therapist called me a subpersonality. He said choosing to spend my life as a multiple would be making a decision to live according to my neurosis. I was obviously someone he had never met before, but I didnt feel comfortable offering my name and introducing myself...and he didnt ask. It was painfully clear to me he felt that if he asked my name, he'd be CATERING TO MY NEUROSIS. So he reffered to me by my birth name, a name that is not mine, and I hated him for it.
This is what many, many of us multiples live with. How many of us ever hear our own names spoken? Have our own friends? Are out to our families? Many of us see mental health proffesionals, and in the mental health community, we plural selves are an abbheration to be fixed, an illusion of a neurotic mind. My god, my therapist told me today he has seen multiples before, and he INTEGRATED them. To me, that's murder without a dead body as evidence of the deed.
So here we are, struggling together as a community to understand ourselves, when even professionals who claim to have studied us understand us so incompletely, and so grotesquely. Yes, we argue. But I, for one, thank god everyone in the community is out there, even though I have never even corresponded with most of it's members. For the most part, the members of this community seem to care for eachother and support eachother even in the midst of the most passionate arguments. I come here to remember something that would be astonishing to my therapist- that it is possible to be worthwhile, kind, ethical and sane, and at the same time, very very multiple.
Re:
Date: 2004-02-20 02:18 am (UTC)Re:
Date: 2004-02-20 06:39 am (UTC)Re:
Date: 2004-02-20 07:40 am (UTC)good luck
love and light
souly and the gang
Re:
Date: 2004-02-20 08:39 am (UTC)I've come to be very cautious, having a double dose of therapists in a sense because my fiance is autistic and taken care of by the state mental health services. He talks about me a lot to his therapist, and the results can be quite unpleasant. It turns out most of these people have dealt with multiples, to my shock, and have formed very negative opinions about them. I believe the very way they are trained to think of multiples causes a lot of animosity in their therapeutic relationships.
I'm glad to know you are having a good experience. thank you for sharing that with us.
Re:
Date: 2004-02-20 09:58 am (UTC)Me being Tir's fiance (yes, everybody, and it's worth making the effort)
I've met this guy too. I was there in that session. He's gay, anti-DSM, kinda new-agey in a subtle way, and I didn't see anything more than established habits of thought prejudiced to multiples. That's why I argued that the guy has to have a chance to overcome his habits of thought. I asked him outright if he had ever met anyone who had expressed a DESIRE to seek wellness multiply (and not be 'integrated').
He said no.
He should be expected to advocate a point of view that he has never, ever seen anybody WANT? I don't think that's fair. He has to have the information, has to understand, and when he's had a chance to do so, if he's still all trash-compactory I will back Tir 1000% on dropping him, and consider it an effort well spent even if it failed.
I will not tolerate the harming of the womEn I love.
But you can't just sit back and expect people to be able to understand and meet your needs if they're too unusual to be common. I'm 'aspie' myself. I totally accept that there are people who will refer to that as a disorder- the name includes the word 'syndrome' for crying out loud! And in some contexts it IS a disorder- it's my responsibility to be in other contexts that aren't like that. I get better with practice, and it's not about going straight for the most prejudiced people I can find and yelling at them, but it CAN mean taking the effort to explain to the slightly clueless or disapproving.
And, a physical brain that is structured in a multi-consciousnessed, parallel-processing way that is at WAR with itselves and hurting itselves and the body- for instance, risking life through stress symptoms or having consciousnesses going psychotic and self-harming- is a disorder, but it is not the structure, IT IS THE WAR that is the disorder.
If you had a group of people beating each other up and hating each other, is it the logical thing to put them in a trash compactor until they promise to be good (or promise to pretend to BE each other on the grounds of "that's my broken arm sticking out of your ear") or do you make peace and sit everybody down to negotiate and try to meet the needs of the most troubled? Possibly asking more of those who are well-adjusted enough to give more, working towards a cooperative situation?
I'm not multiple. I do have some parallelism- I am autistic and have a 'back burner' which is not a person, but an idea processor. Sometimes it cranks up so hard that I stumble over curbs and acknowledge that apparently my backbrain is very busy working on something. It was doing that yesterday- and what was in it was primarily me and Tir's situation with this shrink, his basic decent-ness and other-ness, and the prospects of getting him to get with the program. Also bear in mind that the people he'd seen may well not have been multiple- sounded like they claimed to feel like a bunch of fragments, though it is also possible that he bossed them into 'choosing integration' because he's basically a well guy and they felt very sick and twisted, and deferred to his apparent authority.
That is not going to happen to Tir_nan_og.
Tir_nan_og is going to make this dude (who is not a BAD man) into a multiple-friendly shrink person, even if it means asserting herselves and making an effort. Or at least TRY.
The trash compactor analogy
Date: 2004-02-20 12:13 pm (UTC)Stay groovy!
Re: The trash compactor analogy
Date: 2004-02-20 12:33 pm (UTC)It's as simple as this- I'm a well person who happens to have some mental arrangements that can even be disabling in the wrong context. That gives me the grounds to have made an effort, and having done so, I 'get it', at least with regard to some systems, even without being multiple myself. (I am a sci-fi writer, though- that's why I'm good with words)
You will be seeing more words from me and Tir_nan_og in future- the way things are shaping up we are going to have some books in us, and we had better be good with the words because w.r.t. multiplicity we're essentially going to be arguing against the KILLING of people like Tir. It's not unlike arguing against brainwashing or operant conditioning to make people not gay or not whatever: the fact is you can traumatize or mind-game most people into whatever shape you want them, if you're determined and if they're vulnerable. Being able to really, truly traumatize a multiple person into really, truly being a (probably pretty damaged) singlet means you've killed some people because you thought that best. It's not even necessary to argue that it doesn't work- psychological warfare does work, and for some multiples that's the context in which they wound up hosting several people. If you can kill those people or cripple them through more psychological warfare, that's still morally sketchy.
...which does not mean it's right to paint all shrinks and singlets as murderers. You gotta see the whites of their eyes. How many of them even have devoted a thought to the idea that their 'I', their self, is NOT purely a function of the mechanism of their brain? How many even understand that their brain runs so parallel that it's capable of many things, and simply happens not to be organized in a multiple way?
Not many.
Those that matter have to understand what they're seeing. Those who aren't that relevant to a multiple's life needn't worry their single little heads over it, any more than they have to wonder what it's like for ME to be in a merry, NOISY, crowded social situation. Let them have their frame of reference as long as it's not jabbing you in the spleen...
Damn good show
Date: 2004-02-21 10:25 am (UTC)http://www.astraeasweb.net/plural/guest.html
Good luck on educating the doc, but don't waste too much energy on it.
Re:
Date: 2004-02-20 07:00 am (UTC)I have been lucky enough to find a feww people who will call us each by our names, she herself is Multiple. We love our Unicorn.. Orin especially loves her Ralph.
Most of the time, names of each of us end up as screen names that we use, so we are sometimes called by our so-called handles. It's a nice change to be called by the actual name of who is fronting at the time.
I guess we consider ourselves lucky at times that we know quite a few understanding people, and have other friends who are multipules. Our significant other is also understanding, even when Blood is fronting.
Re:
Date: 2004-02-20 07:42 am (UTC)Re:
Date: 2004-02-20 08:54 am (UTC)It is so fabulous that you are close to another multiple and different people in your seperate systems have relationships with eachother. God, how I wish I knew another multiple in the flesh now. Had a girlfriend who was plural also. Didnt work. In this case, we were too alike, always spinning off into flights of poetic fancy and not dealing with anything unpleasant that needed talking about. The single-minded boyfriend we have now is a godsend, validating of us as individuals, rock-steady and centered.
There is nothing quite so validating or delightful as being called by your own name, is there? I could just purr when I hear it.
We dont sign by our own name here, ironically for this forum, because we are shy! Also we tend to write in groups when talking to others.
regards,
Blue Morpho and Cecily
no subject
Date: 2004-02-19 11:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-02-20 01:08 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-02-20 03:23 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-02-20 07:38 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-02-20 07:44 am (UTC)love and light
souly and the gang
Re:
Date: 2004-02-20 09:35 am (UTC)Re:
Date: 2004-02-20 01:36 pm (UTC)Uhm, this is odd
Date: 2004-02-20 09:12 am (UTC)--Me
Re: Uhm, this is odd
Date: 2004-02-20 09:18 am (UTC)I didn't see either of our posts as particularly offensive, nor do I think this community is in the practice of deleting comments. Is LJ having a brain spasm, and what sort of spasm is it having. I don't think I've seen it mention in any of the support forums.
Anyway, I'll be very annoyed if somehow my comments, and other's comments, were deliberately (or accidentally) deleted without even so much as notifying me, and/or them.
Most bogus.
--Me
Re: Uhm, this is odd
Date: 2004-02-20 09:29 am (UTC)Re: Uhm, this is odd
Date: 2004-02-20 10:30 am (UTC)--Me
Re: Uhm, this is odd
Date: 2004-02-20 10:11 am (UTC)But I think we can all live with it if someone needs to blot out the occasional comment for whatever reason. If someone had to delete stuff I said, I would still have the ideas and nobody ever promised me that I would never have anyone get upset and want to shut me up... that's not really mine, to decree 'you will listen to everything I say!'. It's okay, as I see it. I'm just disappointed to have missed some remarks from my friend.
Re: Uhm, this is odd
Date: 2004-02-20 11:09 am (UTC)This was my comment:
Subject: "I wouldn't give up just yet"
Hardly objectionable. In fact supportive. I'm more than a little annoyed that when I try to be supportive to a person whom I don't agree with, their response is to reply, then delete the whole thing. All that I've done this entire time, is try to be a voice of reason, and that's hard for someone like me.
You know, I would have had significantly less of a problem if the person had asked me to delete it. I might have done so, myself. To find my comment gone with nary a "by your leave", is IMO, rude.
--Me
Re: Uhm, this is odd
Date: 2004-02-20 02:00 pm (UTC)There were some high words, but actually it was a pretty decent discussion on the pros and cons of whether and why poetry should be censored, the nature of censorship, etc. Abruptly, the original poster deleted all the posts and notified the community that she had done so due to the "attacks and flames" she had suffered. I have copies of the posts in question, which were by no means either attacking or flaming.
There were some high words, but actually it was a pretty decent discussion on the pros and cons of whether and why poetry should be censored, the nature of censorship, etc. Abruptly, the original poster deleted all the posts and notified the community that she had done so due to the "attacks and flames" she had suffered. I have copies of the posts in question, which were by no means either attacking or flaming.
<lj-user "asrai"> is the owner of this community, but she has delegated authority (consisting of technical duties) to another user -- I cannot now recall her name. In any case, the policy of the community remains the same: it is essentially meant as a Livejournal version of the old Dark Personalities mailing list; no spoilers, splats or trigger warnings, and no censorship; all subjects open to discussion.
Re: Uhm, this is odd
Date: 2004-02-20 01:34 pm (UTC)Re: Uhm, this is odd
Date: 2004-02-20 01:41 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-02-20 12:31 pm (UTC)I caught that whole exchange to which you are referring (I believe) and thought it was wierd and unproductive myself. Seems that there are alot of ways to be multiple, or to frame one's multiplicity, or to decide which terms are "politically correct" for one's system.
I've found it quite difficult to create stable relationships with other multiples... (although, the few other Msystems I've met personally have been in the "war" stage an weren't very functional)... but it seems to me that any interactions between people are complex and should be treated with care. Keeping in mind that any multiple system is a whole community, interactions between different systems become almost a matter of politics.
It seems like if we, as individual systems, want other's to be open to our reality, our naming conventions, our view of our origin, etc... then it is only fair that we each extend that same tolerance and acceptance to all the other Msystems which we encounter. I think it's okay to say: this is how my system sees a particular issue, but maybe it's a good idea to refrain from making "policy" comments or definitions and applying them other systems.
Whew!
So, even though it is hard for my inside people to get along and negotiate their differences, it seems good practice for them getting along with all the outside people We care about. Maybe working out issues with other Msystems will give us some kind of insight into international/intergroup relations and what kind of attitudes contribute to solving problems vs. creating them.
Who knows? Maybe it will be multiples working together and taking over key ambassador positions who will finally find the way into world peace.
~Okay.. she's a flake, but We love her anyway...~ Drew
Anyhow... follow what path seems to be the most productive for you. I wish you the best!
-Jess for TKS
no subject
Date: 2004-02-20 01:26 pm (UTC)Re therapist change:
Date: 2004-02-20 02:06 pm (UTC)