#i said multiple personality disorder extremely on purpose

[sugary-sheep]

being educated that it is called dissociative identity disorder and not multiple personality disorder in the notes on my shadow beast girl psychosis post. listening And learning. I was today years old.

[atrophiedemotion]

Castor how do we. How do we convince everyone in the whole wide world that Ivan isn't a masochistic individual that only wishes to gratify himself. How do we convince everyone that he wasn't trying to kill Till in round 6. How do we convince everyone that he didn't want to do anything to Till in that casino-karaoke-bar and was just trying to comfort Till and himself from what they just had to gone through. How do we convince everyone that Ivan is actually just very mentally ill and has trouble when it comes to interacting others and Till

Good anaylsis posts btw

*cracks knuckles* you came to the right place, fellow ivan understander. that's honestly the main reason i make my analysis posts, to try to express the humanity in ivan. because he is an incredibly written character and all of those mischaracterizations you're describing are so far from the truth it hurts.

at a base level, there’s a whole thing to be said about the way people treat/view mentally ill individuals (especially those with stigmatized disorders) that plays into this (ivan has undesirable traits due to mental illness that many just decide to write off as him “being a freak” and romanticizing/sexualizing it instead of trying to understand) but i won’t get it into that here

i think the thing with ivan is that because he can't experience emotion or express himself in conventional or "normal" ways, it takes proper reading into (cough. media literacy) to understand his character. you can't just watch the content and immediately get his motivations and personality, it takes multiple watch throughs, knowledge of the extra content, and taking his past into consideration to get a clearer picture.

this is true for every alnst character and video ofc, but the reason it's such a big thing for ivan is because his outward personality post meteor shower incident is a fabrication. the entire point of us getting glimpses into ivan's mind is so that we can see that he ISN'T what he portrays himself as. and this goes for more than just his charismatic personality- it goes for the unusual ways he expresses himself.

we see ivan as a contradiction. we see both the 'perfect' person he wants people to see and the extremely flawed person he sees himself as. neither are completely accurate. ivan's view of himself is so skewed it's unreliable. the only way to truly understand him is to put the work in to find out why.

this isn't exactly an answer to your question/plea, but i've been asking myself the same thing for months. ivan is a really complicated character, more complicated than most people care to fully dig into. in fanon (from what i've seen) he seems to fall into two categories: the persona he puts on, and an "obsessive insane freak". both are very baseline things we see, because that's how ivan sees himself. fake on the outside and a 'shitty' person on the inside.

to me, the point of ivan's character is to look past both of those. to question them and his actions, to wonder what his motivations are. once you get to the point of "oh wow, this was all either for the purpose of survival or because he literally has no idea how to interact with people", things become a lot clearer. we just have to hope people can make the effort to read into things, i guess.

(thank you! great ask, i've been rotating it around in my head for like an hour lmao)

[butch-reidentified]

hi. i saw some of your posts where you mention being a psychopath (or having psychopathic tendencies, i’m not sure what the correct terminology is) and i’m curious. i know someone being a psychopath doesn’t inherently make them evil or bad, but i’ve never known anyone, irl or online who was one. i have some questions.

1. what is the difference between a psychopath and a sociopath?

2. what makes someone a psychopath? are they born like that?

3. is being a pyschopath something you are diagnosed with? how do you know you are one?

4. you’ve mentioned on here that you have a wife. do you feel love? what does love mean to you?

i’m sorry if any of this is too personal. i don’t mean this to be rude, i’m just curious. i have done some research on this before but i’d like to hear what an actual psychopath has to say about it.

hi anon! don't be sorry - the whole point of me posting about it (which I honestly did not think would go this well lmao) is to educate and counter the absolutely rampant misinformation out there. this site is a pretty good resource working with actual researchers and clinicians. where I disagree with them is the classification of psychopathy as a mental disorder.

as I said in that post, I think it's a natural variation within the population that serves its own purpose.

the term itself is somewhat controversial for multiple reasons. one is the obvious: it's highly stigmatized and media representation is utterly absurd cartoon villain type shit. this does not bother me, but I have heard other people say it bothers them. regardless, I think it's a really interesting topic, which is why I want to talk about it and engage with others. the second reason the term is a bit complicated is this: outside of the actual field, barely anyone knows what it means or how it compares to "sociopath" or to the ASPD diagnosis. Psychopathy and ASPD are commonly believed to be the same; this is a misconception based on outdated information - the website I linked discusses this a bit.

1. sociopath isn't a clinical term. it means whatever the person using it wants it to mean. psychopathy on the other hand is a clinical term (but not a diagnosis!) which refers to a specific set of personality traits. Psychopathy is very much a spectrum. sort of in the way autism is, in that some people are very high in 1 psychopathic trait and low in others, another person might be high in a different 1 or 2 traits, etc. I am much higher on boldness than disinhibition, for instance, where my wife is the opposite.

2. this is a veeery debated topic. some people use the categorization of primary (born with it) vs secondary (comes from extreme abuse/trauma/etc) psychopathy. I'm not sure how much I believe in the second one, but I haven't written it off necessarily. I have had distinctively psychopathic traits my entire life. these traits have shifted and changed as I've grown, but only to such a degree, just as anyone's core personality traits do throughout growing up and all of life. The site I linked above has a page on this that is a much better take than that primary/secondary shit.

3. as I said above, no, it's not a diagnosis. and in my view, it's just a way to quickly describe people at one end of the spectrum of human emotionality/empathy/interpersonal relating. in cases like mine, it's pretty obvious to anyone I'm totally open and honest with. I'll give a couple examples.

I don't feel fear - like, at all, not even in life or death situations. I do not remember a time I have felt genuine fear as an emotion. I have felt adrenaline (though my threshold for that is reeeeally high) but the only emotion I ever end up with from that is irritability once it starts wearing off, though I haven't figured out why lmao. I don't know if this is just me or a more typical part of psychopathy, but it's fairly common for me to have the chemical/physiological side of an emotion without the emotional feeling itself - like what I just described with the adrenaline. I do experience anxiety (actually a pretty common comorbidity) sometimes, but it tends to be a very cerebral form of it, and is almost never *about* anything, just there.

I don't usually feel anything when friends or family members die. if they're very important to me, I get a little sad, but it's not very strong or long-lasting. I don't feel anything when other people are in mental or physical pain, even if I have caused it. this doesn't mean I can't care about people, just that it's a conscious decision and doesn't come with emotional attachment. my cognitive empathy is positively excellent.

I was a total nightmare as a kid. I was always always getting in trouble, and roping other kids into my unhinged (and usually dangerous) schemes. I was not always kind to other kids. I tended to manipulate peers who looked up to me for my entertainment when I was really young, but I did correct this behavior because it's not remotely worth it, and because I do make an effort to live as normally as possible and put significant effort into maintaining and adhering to a strict code of ethics (this is very difficult tbqh, but I have a high capacity for self-discipline). I was always getting in fights. I practically lived in the principal's office. I could NOT be told what to do. Punishment had zero impact. My mom wound up on antidepressants (this may have very little or even nothing to do with me, but idk & figured it was worth mentioning in case it was). I'm lucky I didn't get arrested. I realized I was headed that direction mid high school and sorted my shit out.

4. My wife and I love each other in our own way. She feels things a bit more than I do, and she DEFINITELY feels love as an emotion more than I do. But we talk openly about that, and she genuinely accepts me as I am and knows that I love her to the best of my ability, in my own way, and I go to extra efforts to make her feel loved because I'm aware that I can't reciprocate quite what she feels. That said, she is also rather high in psychopathic traits like I mentioned previously, which explains why we bonded initially over the things that we did (things I'd better not specify lol). It also means she really isn't bothered by me not being terribly affectionate, romantic, patient, or just generally any of the things most people want in a partner lmao. I do really try for her though. I definitely consistently form closer connections with other high-psychopathy individuals than anyone else. She rarely uses tumblr but is @psychichologramnightmare if you have any questions for her 😁

as for what love means to me, I think it's pretty individual. there are many components to love as we conceptualize it. love as a concept & love as a literal emotional feeling are sort of different in my mind, I guess.

[theleechyskrunkly]

16, 20, and 21 for all the skrunklies

EHEHEHHEHEHE THESE ARE GOOD ONES

16- For Paige:

His pain tolerance is intermediate. Being raised in an extremely well off family and being carefully sheltered for most of his life, Paige has had very rare encounters with pain. But when he does experience pain, he tends to jolt, momentarily freeze, then move on or make a calculated decision on what to do next, depending on the amount of pain inflicted (this is the exact sequence in which he reacted when he started drowning. When he realized he couldn't swim back up, he just froze and let himself sink).

He hasn't experienced a lot of things more painful than being stomped on by hundreds of adults as a 9 year old 💀

For Aurinelle:

This guy has some intense pain tolerance. You could torture him with boiling hot water and he wouldn't bat an eye. I mean ask Floyd, no matter how many times he squeezes Aurinelle, it's as if he were giving him a massage instead of choking! And that cheeky smirk when he sees that Floyd has given up on squeezing the life out him, makes Floyd cranky as hell.

20- For Paige:

Paige actually is a pretty jealous person! But he doesn't really show it. He doesn't want to seem possessive and make whoever is causing him jealousy uncomfortable.

His jealousy usually manifests when he's having a conversation with someone he really likes, but when he sees them talking to someone else, they seem happier than when they're with him. He just lets it happen and shrinks back to allow the person to do whatever they want. He thinks that maybe he's just bored them or that he's not all that important in their life.

For Aurinelle:

Aurinelle is the manifestation of petty. He doesn't get jealous easy, but when he does he makes it pretty obvious.

If someone makes him jealous for whatever reason, he resorts to giving them the cold shoulder. Ignoring texts, not listening when they try to ask him what's wrong, plus other petty tactics.

When it comes to who he's jealous of, he decides to assert dominance (male alpha moment 😭) by purposely making his aura more intimidating and making himself look bigger (for literally no reason. You're already a giant dude).

Oh, and he pouts. And glares. He pouts and glares a lot.

21- For Paige:

I answered this previously, but that was for a different ask game, so I'll answer it again!

Paige has undiagnosed PTSD Type 2, also known as ASD(Acute Stress Disorder) as well as Agoraphobia, the fear of crowds and places that may cause panic, helplessness, and/or embarrassment.

Paige isn't aware of his ASD, and he could've gotten treatment for it before it developed into PTSD, but his parents never took him to a therapist after the events that caused him a trauma, so he's never actually dealt with it in any way.

He deals with his Agoraphobia by just staying as far away from crowds as possible.

For Aurinelle:

Oof this guy. Aurinelle has undiagnosed PTSD type 4, also known as Complex PTSD, which consists of multiple experienced traumas instead of just one, and is easier to trigger than uncomplicated PTSD. He also has panic and anxiety disorder, all which he developed when he was young, heightening his sensitivity to dangerous situations. He is also claustrophobic :(

As I said previously, these illnesses are undiagnosed, so Aurinelle is unaware he has them. When he notices symptoms, he dismisses them as siren survival instincts instead of actually acknowledging them.

He refuses to admit he's claustrophobic (he thinks Azul or the tweels will use it against him).

GOODNESS GRACIOUS THIS IS LONG 😨

Tagging: @elenauaurs @distant-velleity @cyanide-latte @xen-blank @thehollowwriter for silly oc ask games :D

[cdd-media-share]

Extensive Research Gives Credibility To Multiple Personality Diagnosis. The Press-Courier - Jun. 23, 1985

By ZENIA CLEIGH

Copley News Service

-----------------------------------------

DISCLAIMER:

The things in this article might not reflect current-day understandings of DID.

I am simply sharing this for archival purposes, and to generally share some old, neat things related to CDDs. I'm just sharing for fun and out of interest.

THIS IS NOT AN EDUCATIONAL RESOURCE!

Content warnings: the language used in this article is quite weird and uncomfortable at times/cringey. It is from 1985, after all.

-----------------------------------------

SAN DIEGO - On a Tuesday afternoon about two years ago, psychiatrist Dr. Neal A. Kline was awaiting his next patient, a middle-age, modestly dressed and very literate woman we will call Ruth.

Five minutes to the hour she appeared. She wore a cocktail dress, hovered uncerainly in the doorway and refused repeated invitations to sit down. Perplexed at this confusing behavior in a patient he had been treating for depression for four months, Kline finally insisted that she take her usual seat.

The patient arched an eyebrow. "I'm surprised you have any practice at all when I see how rude you are. Is this how you treat all your new patients?" she said. "And by the way, are you Dr. Kline?"

It is not often in the life of a psychiatrist that such a bombshell drops. Suddenly, it all made sense. Her unusually regal air that day. The unexpected attention to fashion. The flirtatious looks.

Kline took a deep breath, drew on all accumulated wisdom and inquired cautiously: "Now that you know my name, what's yours?"

"My name," she said, "is Raquel."

Thus it was that Kline first realized he was not dealing with a depressive, but with a person suffering from multiple personality disorder - that condition in which the patient periodically shifts into different personalities of which the "host" personality has absolutely no memory.

IT IS A condition he, along with the majority of psychiatrists, had never seen. And what he had witnessed - appearance of Raquel in the place of Ruth - flew in the face of medical skepticism on the subject of multiple personalities. "If you haven't seen on," he said, "you don't believe it's true. It's like being converted almost. It's not the kind of disorder you talk a neutral party into believing.

Yet Kline persisted, became an authority on the subject and eventually presented a paper last fall at the First International Conference on Multiple Personality/Dissociative States held in Chicago, a seriously organized event attended by 500 professionals.

The fact is that multiple personality disorder - dramatized in such sesational movies as "Three Faces of Eve" and "Sybil" - does exist.

In fact, said psychiatrist Dr. Bennett G. Braun, director of the dissociative disorders program at Rush Presbyterian-St. Luke's Medical Center in Chicago, and an organizer of the conference, "There's a lot more out there than people think."

Study focused on multiple personality disorder during the past five years has given rise to some potentially significant observations:

-Those who suffer from the disorder usually are creative, intelligent women with a good working memory, an ability to dissociate (that is, divorce their awareness from a source of extreme pain) and a background (almost 97% are victims of sadistic child abuse).

-THE VARIOUS personalities of such those with the disorder display such amazing differences in allergy levels, electroencephalogram readings and sensitivity to medication that they point to new implications for psychosomatic medicine.

Braun estimates there now are about 4,000 known cases in the United States and the figure is rising rapidly as doctors become familiar with the diagnosis, although the exact number is impossible to ascertain.

According to Dr. Frank Putnam, who researches the disorder at St. Elizabeth's Hospital in Washington, D.C., instances have been reported since the 1700s and numerous case studies were published at the turn of this century. At that time, however, the new diagnosis of schizophrenia, which is characterized by hallucinations and disordered thinking, came into fashion and many multiple personalities were mistakenly diagnosed as schizophrenic. In the late 1970s, Putnam said, "cases in the medial literature started to take off again."

Recently, several prestigious psychiatric journals have published such articles. And in 1980, the third edition of the Diagnostic and Statistic Manual of Mental Disorder (the standard classification of mental diseases) elevated multiple personality disorder from a subcategory of hysteria to a bona fide dissociative disorder of its own, with specific diagnostic criteria.

The disorder is described as the existence within the individual of two or more distinct personalities, each of which is dominant at a particular time, each of which is complex and possessed of its own unique behavior patterns and social relationships.

SAID KLINE, who is an associate clinical professor of psychiatry at the University of California at San Diego School of Medicine, amnesia, or "blackouts" occur between the host personality and the sub-personalities, although there may be varying degrees of awareness of each other among those.

"Each of us can say, 'I was in a good or bad mood' As long as you remember it, you're not a multiple personality" he said. "A multiple has no memory of events going on when another personality takes over."

His multiple personality patient, Kline discovered, turned out to have three main personalities - Ruth, the depressed, victimized "host" personality; Raquel, the flirtatious, sexy woman with a yen for world travel, and Regina, the mature, prudent observer. In addition, there are the occasional personalities of a little girl named Ricki and a woman like her immigrant mother. (To protect the confidentiality of Kline's patient, all names have been changed.)

It is extremely distressed, not to say maddening, condition to be in, Kline said, particularly since Ruth often is stuck paying the bills for trips Raquel took and of which she has no memory.

At one point, Kline received postcards from all over South America from his patient's various lesser personalities. "I do want to live!" wrote Raquel, in one. "I, too, would like to live," Regina penned below. "And me, what about me?" squealed Ricki. "I want to live, too!"

"HARDLY A week goes by where there are seven complete days she remembers," said Kline, who is used to getting desperate phone calls from his patient when she "wakes up" at remote airports. "Sometimes it's four to five days, sometimes one and a half, sometimes a few hours. Sometimes she takes long trips where she disappears for three weeks. If she has a whole week she remembers, she considers that a victory."

He went on: "Her basic mood from all this is one of constant depression. Her life is constantly in shambles and debt. She can never do the simple things we all take for granted, like getting a steady job and seeing a steady person. She's become an isolated person who has to live by some sort of after-the-fact wit to cover all the problems that she's just as surprised to find out about as anybody. It's no life, that's the bottom life."

Ruth was severely abused as a child and according to Braun, it is frequent, unpredictable and inconsistent abuse, along with exposure to some kind of love, that drives a child to begin the patterns of dissociation that eventually coalesce in a number of different, defensive personalities designed to deal with the trauma.

Abused children who do not develop multiple personality disorder usually use suppression and denial measures to defend themselves, often becoming adults with some type of sexual dysfunction and inability to experience joy, according to Braun. In contrast, patients with multiple personalities usually split off into personalities that are allowed these pleasures.

THE ABUSE to which multiple personality disorder patients were subjected to as children often is sadistic, bizarre and ritualistic. Braun knows of cases where a child was locked up in a room for three summer months, or forced to walk to the hospital with a ruptured appendix; where a child was told, "I love you," and then burned with a cigarette, or dangled out of a skyscraper window or forced to sit in her own excrement. One child's mother tried to drown her in the bathtub. Another was forced to witness several bizarre murders.

Overwhelmingly traumatic early conditions such as many hospitalizations in early years, or a series of deaths in the family, along with verbal degradation, distortions of truth, and "double bind" messages (wherein a child is told, "I love you" right after a beating, for example) all can weaken the hold on reality and force dissociation.

This ability of the human mind to block out pain by going into altered states of consciousness has become the subject of scientific research. In studies for the National Institute of Mental Health in Bethesda, Md., and St. Elizabeth's Hospital, Putnam subjected patients with multiple personality disorder and a control group to a type of electroencephalogram study called an "evoke potential."

He found that the brain waves of the controls remained the same, even when they pretended to be different personalities. In starting contrast, the brain wave readings of the patients with multiple personality disorder showed marked differences between the various personalities.

THE STUDIES indicated, said Braun, "the personalities are as different as two separate people in different bodies… The implications are that we have great variability in our nervous system and in our being that we don't exhibit generally.

Braun discovered that he could put a patient to sleep by administering 5 milligrams of a tranquilizer, while a dosage of 30 milligrams given intravenously to the same person in a different personality mode would have only the mildest calming effect.

He told of the case of a male multiple personality who was allergic to citrus juices in all personalities but one. If this personality ate an orange and remained in control of the body long enough to digest the orange, no ill effects would occur. However, if he switched to a different personality too soon, a rash that itched and blistered often would result.

Said Kline, "there are implications for psychosomatic medicine here.. This makes it clear that psyche (mind) can control soma (the body), and soma can control psyche."

Treating the psyche of a patient with multiple personality disorder involves uncovering traumatic incidents from the past and creating options for the personality fragments to coalesce into a more integrated adult personality. Sometimes hypnosis is helpful as a way of reaching painful, buried memories.

But the treatment is not easy. "It's not the kind of thing that comes clean fast," said Kline. "You're trying to uncover some early memories for which there is usually amnesia. When you provoke any conflict areas, there's a reflex built in to switch to another personality at those moments.

"WHEN YOU try to deal with individual personalities and reduce their power, they fight back because they feel they're being killed by whatever therapy is going on. So the ambition of fusion - mixing the personalities into some kind of cohesive whole - is in fact the exact direction the person has the reflex to flee from."

As Kline pointed out in the paper he gave at the conference, treating a multiple personality - replete with conflicting behaviors and double messages - also can be a disorienting experience for the therapist. Still, if a patient is lucky enough to have a doctor who will be patient, the chances of recovery after two to seven years of therapy are considered excellent.

As for Ruth, therapeutic work continues on uncovering the painful events of her childhood. She still has periods where her other personalities "get out," after which she despairs of recovery. Kline, however, thinks things may be looking up. She announced to him one day recently, "I know what I have to do to get better. All I have to do is start acting like Raquel when I'm really being Ruth."

Said Kline, "that was really brilliant. That's what integration is all about.

[ed-recovery-affirmations]

Hi! I wanted to ask for advice on how to deal with extreme emotions controlling how much I eat or don't eat?

Something I wanted to clarify is that when I don't eat, I'm not starving myself on purpose, but when I do eat, I am purposely binging.

For a long time I lost weight thanks to being too anxious to eat. I would throw up during anxiety attacks, and lose my appetite for weeks during periods of stress. I was severely underweight and many doctors assumed I was dealing with anorexia simply based off my weight, even after I explained I wasn't losing weight on purpose and just had extreme anxiety affecting my eating habits and making me throw up.

Nowadays, my depression is a lot stronger than my anxiety. (I am dealing with grief from multiple deaths in the family, I'm disabled, and because of my life circumstances, it's very unlikely that I'll ever be able to live independently or work outside of home)

While anxiety makes me throw up or lose my appetite for food, depression does the opposite. I binge eat out of depression. I feel bored and aimless all day so I try to fix it by overeating, and I don't feel like a normal person when I eat. I plan out my binge sessions and consume way more food than what's healthy for me, even to the point where I physically feel sick from the bloating, or from eating foods that I'm sensitive to since I suffer from GI issues. I don't feel full after I finish binging, and it's starting to become very disruptive.

On the one hand I'm glad that I have an appetite and that I'm not at an unhealthy low weight anymore but I realize that what I'm doing now isn't an ideal coping mechanism, either. I'm having a lot of trouble coping, I don't have a doctor who I see regularly, and I can feel myself spiraling out of control. How do I learn how to eat normally?

Hm. This is such a complex situation. Chronic health conditions can be so difficult in these situations. If you're able to access counseling, I'd say start the process of finding a counselor who's a good fit for you. This will be someone who can guide you with a tailor-made plan just for you, and can adapt it at every step of the way. If you get someone who has expertise in eating disorder recovery, they might know about some of the health issues you ought to work on addressing. If you can get a new doctor, I absolutely would. The root issue here seems to be the stress vomiting, and you absolutely need professionals who will listen to you and take that issue seriously. Both a primary care provider and a mental health counselor might be good resources for helping you take on a multipronged approach to that problem. I'm so sorry you had to experience a doctor who wouldn't listen to you.

I understand your need to binge while you feel able to eat to get your body weight up. Do be aware that by prolonging this pattern, you may be ingraining the binge-restrict pattern more deeply into your body and mind. This is typically a pattern with people who are trying to restrict deliberately, as their bodies get more and more desperate and then when they do allow themselves to eat, they get out of control. It sounds like your body is creating a similar response because when you're depressed it knows you can reliably keep food down. But unfortunately ingraining this cycle into your body may cause long-term health issues too.

It must be so tempting to continue the cycle of overeating since it seems like a way to kill two birds with one stone. It balances out the times you can't keep food down and regulates your weight, and the dopamine from the binge gives you an easy boost out of the depression. But binge eating isn't a depression cure, especially not as it sinks into a pattern, and you said yourself you've noticed you include eating foods that make you feel crappy because you literally don't care. This is not helping you fix your relationship with food, I'm guessing. And it also won't help you learn to work through depression in a healthy way. Doctors and counselors might be able to help you with that and anxiety too, which I bet would help your relationship with food as well.

For the short term, do what keeps you alive and keep eating what you can when you can. But make sure you immediately prioritize accessing resources that will help you to break this cycle. If you're not finding the right doctors or counselors, switch. I know it's hard. I know it's a daunting process. But you've got to invest in you if you can. Be compassionate with yourself if you have setbacks, because it sounds like life has really been walloping you with obstacles and you've got to keep in mind that no one copes perfectly with circumstances like that. I hope things get better for you in spite of the many obstacles that have been thrown your way.

[trash-iest]

1,4,12,15,23,35,38,40,4650,55,60,75,78,83,86. You don't have to answer these. It's alot I know and I'm sorry. Just.. curious 😅

1. What do you crave in a psychological sense? Intimacy, passion, purpose, belonging, social interaction, etc.?

Passion & purpose (im sorry it's impossible to choose one)

4. Who's the most important person in your life right now? Why?

Myself because i need to consistently work towards my 5 year goal. Its the bare minimum but feels a lot so im hoping ill adjust and become a better version of myself if not the best.

12. What's your most controversial opinion? Would you state it publicly? What's the most controversial opinion that you would publicly support, if it's different?

The moon is made of cheese and pluto is a planet. Oh i would shamelessly state that publicly and stick out my tongue if the other person tries to educate me on the matter (im sorry if you were looking for serious answers, we dont do that over texting)

15. Is there a song, book, movie, or other piece of media that has drastically altered your life? What was it, are there multiple?

This is stupid (but youre allowed to laugh at how basic i am) Book: 13 reasons why. So just a bit of context: Up until grade 7 i was an extremely insensitive kid like id mindlessly laugh at people in school, made fun of their insecurities and was completely clueless about feelings/emotions. It was just considered banter since i was the class clown but the way id gang up with my group and tease other kids was wrong, yet no one corrected this behaviour (tbf i didnt grow up with cousins and they rarely ever visited so there was no sense of realisation) Now end of grade 7 i came across this book and I casually started reading it like any other book and lets just say i didnt expect the traumatising details. It was nothing like the stuff i used to read and it ended up giving me the biggest reality check. I started analysing my behaviour and realised how i might be an actual bully and i couldnt fathom the thought of someone resorting to self harm or suicide because of my silly jokes so i stopped and apologised to those few people. Lets just say this book was the first step towards developing eq and becoming a better person.

23. What would you never admit to in real life?

A LOT of things. I cant really think of anything atm but i mostly just stay quiet when people say questionable shit because i dont have the energy to explain my pov and idc about their opinion lol.

35. What's wrong with you? Physically, mentally, whatever comes to mind. What's right about you? What are your best and worst traits?

Physically— i have a HUGE nose, kinda short, dont have grey/hazel eyes, i wear specs (doesnt look cute), my nails chip every time i grow them out and theyre not a natural pretty shape. Also, i dont feel pretty like an actual girl; im not elegant or any of that and neither am i a hot tomboy. Im just eh. (Edit: i just remembered the dark circles and i look dead without lipstick/lip taint lol)

Mentally— anxious sometimes but thankfully no more anxiety attacks. I feel like my major trust and commitment issues come under personality disorders but ill just list them here. My therapist said im stubborn and very rigid (and I believe him over anyone else) and quite frankly i feel incapable of forming a real human connection. To sum up my worst traits: Im mostly horrible at reciprocation, im always emotionally unavailable, im selfish, hella lazy, careless, stupid. Im definitely forgetting something so whenever I remember it ill add it here lol. My best traits: im very understanding when it comes to the other person needing their space. Im a good listener because i rarely have good advice or solutions lol. Im calm and rarely ever lose my temper which doesnt really last long. I believe in communication instead of letting misunderstandings grow until they explode (im guessing thats good because it has strengthened my friendships)

38. Who do you miss, if anyone?

My 15 year old self. She was so happy, loved the way she looked and was so mentally stable (i might be considered a narcissist at this point)

40. Would you sacrifice your life for a stranger? An acquaintance? A loved one?

I WILL SACRIFICE MY OWN LIFE FOR PAKISTAN (its hard for me to be consistently serious, bear with it pls)

46. Do you have a "right person, wrong time"?

Yeah feels like it

50. What qualities do you find charming?

Whatever prince charming brings to the table (its so hard to be serious about this im sorry it reminds me of middle school)

55. What reminds you of your childhood?

Certain songs, snacks and a few places.

60. What are you afraid of? What are your worst fears? Are you afraid of any of the following - the dark, fire, heights, being alone, people, spiders, snakes, blood, drowning, or death?

Betrayal/abandonment from someone i truly love, getting attached to the wrong person, staying unemployed after graduation, childbirth and raising my own kids, emotionally depending on someone and lizards 💀 Of the following: people, only the big spiders like tarantulas etc, snakes, drowning only because i dont know how to swim and its a very painful death from what ive heard so no thank you.

75. What is your favourite fairytale?

Definitely hansel and gretel because of that edible cottage (still such a dream) but I recently read the story of the youth who went forth to learn what fear was (grimm's fairytales) and its my favourite one as an adult now.

78. Have you ever written a poem or song about someone? Or had someone write one about you? Do you hope to have either of those experiences in the future?

Nope i havent. My best friend has written poetry for me, about 3 times. It was super cute but it constantly made me feel indebted because ive never made a grand gesture like that and what she wrote was proper poetry and she appreciates me so much. Ive only ever written her letters with my ugly handwriting yet she treasures them. Hypothetically if i do find someone in the future like that idk how id react but ill definitely be thinking about ways to reciprocate.

83. What's your type? Otherwise, do you think you attract a certain sort of person?

An aromantic asexual or at least someone whose love language isnt physical touch and theyre naturally not a cheezy person but i feel like im asking for a lot here since most people associate romance with their partners and what i say is considered abnormal or bs so lets not go there. Ill need to be attractive to attract a certain type of people or anyone for that matter lol.

86. What could you talk about for hours?

Honestly my chattiness depends on my mood or the type of day im having instead of a particular topic.

[wellofdean]

These tags from @i-have-doubts:

#if he *somehow* doesnt then the only explanation is that the dean in his head fully takes over and jackles blacks out#like literally couldnt fathom another answer than his own personal version of hollywood multiple personality disorder#(aka the inaccurate movie version instead of irl D.I.D.)#litcherally how could he not know what he's doing?#he's so precise about how he plays dean and he's more obsessed about spn than any of us#and has as encyclopedic of a knowledge about the show as anyone filming it nonstop for 24 eps a season could for 15 years#like yeah sure...technically there's tumblr girlies who probably have the show better memorized than him#but that man has devoted brain space to remembering everything about spn that a dad with 18hr film shoots cant afford#all i'm saying is that it is by far the least plausible option that he *didnt* realize the destiel#he was putting his whole acting pussy into

Bingo. Like, he would have to be a Zombie, Or one of those fungus-possessed ants? IT IS BY FAR THE LEAST PLAUSIBLE OPTION that he didn't realise that Destiel was streaming forth out of his extremely purposeful face. A-fucking-greed. I could buy it that DEAN didn't know Cas loved him (though not that Dean didn't know Dean loved Cas), but I cannot buy that Jensen did not know what story he was telling his his entire and formidable "acting pussy".

And, in fact, if you take everything Jensen has ever said about Dean's feelings on the matter as a comment Jensen is making from Dean's POV, then...those answers make a LOT of sense. Jensen is, in fact, quite consistently unwilling to say anything about it beyond what Dean has already experienced, and that is right, proper and good in a story that isn't over. The fact that he won't say it doesn't mean that Jensen, as an artist, is unaware of what he is putting down.

Let's give that dude a little credit.

So... Jensen Ross Texas Cheerleader Drama Club Mechanical Bull-Rider Clothes-Horse Fairy Princeling Ackles did an unmistakably legible and bang up job of acting the complete shit out of the entire insane series of events that we who watched the show with our own two eyes sensibly call The Widower Arc, and I am supposed to believe that he did not realise his character was in love with Castiel, angel of the lord, fallen in everyway possible from the moment he laid a hand on Dean in hell? And then later, Jensen R. T. C. D. C. M. B. R. C. H. F. P. Ackles further acted his sweet little patooties off bringing us the unhinged series of events that those of us with eyes and who saw it call The Divorce Arc? And now we learn that when Cas was telling Dean he loved him, Jensen was playing his own personal DESTIEL AMV inside his brain, and y'all are wondering, does Jensen understand that DESTIEL?!?!!!

Plz.

[translationandbetrayals]

Cyberpunk: Edgerunners and the corruption of the main character

Warning: A lots of Spoilers

Cyberpunk: Edgerunners it´s an anime of 10 chapters based on the world of the game Cyberpunk 2077, the story take place in Night City, a futuristic city where the corruption, the cybernetic addiction and the gang violence abound. The city is controlled by two important corporations, MIlitech and Arasaka, which keeps a constant rivalry around their technological products. The plot unfolds around David Martinez, a teenager who for different reasons lost everything and choose to join to a gang of mercenaries or “Edgerunners” which wins the life based in the technology theft and the assassination.

In many series we can see how the protagonist change along the plot, progressing in the construction of their personality, where sometimes took goods and bad choices, what it is usual for a developing teenager, and as long as it grows it will deteriorate. I think Cyberpunk: Edgerunners had a very good representation of this, because we start with a David Martinez, immature, impulsive, temperamental, a full-blown teenager. Have economic problems that lead to be a victim of bullying, but as the events progress, we see how the character will fall slowly, starting with the first big event, the dead of his mother and his only family, fact that left him practically in the street and with debt everywhere. Thanks to the bullying don´t stop even with the death of his mother, he takes the decision of implant the “Sandevistan”, a cyberware, a kind of technological weapon of military nature implanted on his spine which allows him to move at superhuman speed, all this with the purpose to take revenge of his bullies.

(An important concept what is being said to us during the plot it´s the existence of the “Cyberpsycho”, are people who have suffered psychotic disorders in their personality related with the anxiety that entail certain amount of cyberware in the body and the stress accumulation)

Later he meets Lucy, a cyberpunk whose dream was to travel to the moon, in a bad way she takes him to meet to a mercenaries with which will work later. As the plot progress we will be witnesses how David risks his life in multiple times, as much as for the use of the Sandevistan as for the missions that slowly becomes more dangerous, including the time when he sees his own death related with the cyberpsychosis in a simulation called “Neurodance” what leaves him with certain trauma. Along with the above, he faces a job where several gang members die, including Maine, the leader and the father figure of David, death linked with a case of cyberpsychosis, what leads to David, time later, to become the leader of the gang. Now with the new position we found out that he has increased the numbers of cyberware implants, what makes the other characters close to David on alert for the fear to he becomes a cyberpsycho. Already in the last chapters, we found out that now he have a relation with Lucy, and we can see how his mind begins to deteriorate, despite now he had a more mature and adult appearance, it doesn´t take long to we know that he has started to have cyberpsychosis symptoms, accompanied by tremors and hallucinations that takes him to kill innocent people. Already in the end of the story, we see how David is forced to use a cyberskeleton in an attempt to save Lucy, all this because of Arasaka. David has almost completely lost his sanity and the medicines that helped him no longer work, he is only moved by the memory of his mother and being able to meet Lucy again. He tries to save Lucy and his friends with the little sanity that remains and finally he faces Smasher, an ex-military man working for Arasaka with the mission stop and kill David, purpose that fulfills. We finished with a scene of Lucy walking in the surface of the moon remembering the David she meets long time ago.

During the plot we see how David constantly faces extremely unfortunate events and even traumatizing, events that affect his mental health, causing diseases that we could describe as anxiety, depression, or posttraumatic stress. How I say previously, this it´s not too weird to see in another stories , a hero who is taken to the deepest of the abyss, but I think this case its such a good example, in 10 chapters we see how the main character lost his mind in the attempt of being someone strong and when the spectator still has a little hope with everything ending well, David die, leaving us with a bittersweet taste, because, although everything ended badly, at least fulfill one of his purposes and took Lucy to the moon.

Rodrigo González

[sophieinwonderland]

Okay, I want to break down this post that made it to the top of the syscourse tag, especially since it was vagueing an earlier conversation with me.

For the first point, the term "plural" was used specifically to distance itself from OSDD/DID, as an alternative to "multiple" which was more used in OSDD/DID spaces at the time. I assume then that this statement isn't about the term "plural" being intrinsically linked to DID/OSDD but rather, the concept of being multiple beings in one body itself.

And that, I feel, is an equally problematic claim. Spiritual possession has existed throughout the entire world in nearly every culture throughout human history. In contrast, OSDD/DID were only recognized as medical disorders in the past couple hundred years or so. Most plurality throughout history has been considered spiritual in nature. OSDD/DID systems don't own a monopoly on the concept, nor do they even make up the majority of people who could technically fall under the plural umbrella.

As for this hypothetical, sure, it can happen in some case. But OSDD and DID are already highly comorbid with a large number of other disorders. I legitimately wonder how many endo-identifying traumagenic systems with PTSD symptoms with suicidal ideation who aren't in therapy already would suddenly decide to seek help if they knew they had a dissociative disorder on top of that.

Most of the time, this is just stacking one extra diagnosis onto a pile. And if someone's not getting treated for other issues, why would they get treated for this one?

There's obviously value in getting the diagnosis for treatment purposes, but this seems like it could usually be worked out between therapists and patients naturally over the course of treatment for other conditions.

(By the way, I believe the statistic that this is referencing is that 70% of outpatients diagnosed with DID had attempted suicide. This is not a suicide rate. That's obviously way too high and I'm not saying this to minimize the statistic, but because I want to keep facts straight. Also, this study was focused strictly on DID, and did not include OSDD systems as the quote suggests.)

It's never just been about how this hurts non-disordered plurals. That's narrow-minded. It's about how psychiatry as a whole handles and should handle mental health.

The focus of mental health programs is helping people reach a point that's healthy for themselves, not just stopping them from being "different."

For tulpamancy, specifically, many tulpamancers report improvements in symptoms of other disorders because of their plurality. It's likely the same would prove true for other non-OSDD/DID systems If a non-OSDD/DID system is seeking treatment for reasons unrelated to their plurality, trying to diagnose them with a dissociative disorder and convince them that a system that's been overall beneficial to their mental health is part of a disorder can be extremely harmful to the system's mental health.

In the case of someone with MDD who create a tulpa for companionship, the plurality should be seen as a form of treatment to an existing condition, not a disorder, and attempting to treat the plurality could deprive a "DISORDERED" person something that's helping them to heal.

But let's go beyond that and talk about religious considerations. Like I said, the first plurality was spiritual. Should all instances of possession where a spiritual identity takes over be considered pathological? What about voices?

The book When God Talks Back describes religious practices where certain evangelical Christian groups speak to "God" until they can have two-way conversations with it in ways that resemble mind-voice communication. (Also mentioned here.) Should we deem this form of voice-hearing inherently pathological due to similarities to certain hallucinatory experiences, even though the evangelicals (like the tulpamancers) report positive health benefits with no notable impairment?

I know some atheists have the meme that religion is a mental illness, but at what point would medicalizing all experiences of voice hearing and dissociative identity states become religious discrimination?

Finally, let's come back to how this affects disordered systems. You say that you're not saying systems need final fusion, and that's great. But you're supporting the same mentality that leads to that, by pathologizing the experience of plurality itself.

If plurality is inherently pathological, then why wouldn't final fusion be the ideal option for healing 100% of the time? That's the logic used by singlets who think final fusion is the only valid goal for therapy, and don't understand why any system would choose to remain plural.

When you shift the definition of a disorder to any experience of being different, you then subsequently shift the goal of therapy to reaching normalcy and fitting in with society rather than achieving a personal standard of health. And that's sanism.

In the end, I think we're lucky that the American Psychiatric Association is intelligent enough to acknowledge and recognize that not all presentations of similar symptoms should be considered pathological in the DSM-5, and it's integral that we continue to defend that going forward against people who would seek to medicalize non-medical experiences.

[starrbar]

Hoo boy. Okay... I don't know if I should respond to this further because it really sounds like these opinions are something you're thoroughly convinced of, and I'm trying to stop deluding myself into thinking I can change anyone's mind about this kind of stuff.

Feel free to just... tell me if you don't want to continue, and I'll respect that (provided you're not like, an asshole about it I guess, but you really don't seem like one).

I obviously agree with your first point (I've only identified two main points, for the record) and I appreciate the perspective of someone with BPD, as I don't know much about the disorder, but it's very interesting to see those parallels/comparisons.

However, I have to tell you, point blank, that there is a debate over whether loli/shotacon is uniquely harmful to real people. That's (part of) why the anti/proship war is an ongoing thing. There's even debate and research in various scientific fields about the nature and effect of strange sexual fantasies. To say that "Lolisho is dangerous no matter what." is just a fact of life that shouldn't be debated is categorically false.

As far as I've ever been able to tell, there is no quality unique to lolisho that could harm kids in a way that something else couldn't. A groomer could convince a kid that whatever awful thing they're doing to them is okay using regular porn of adults, or sfw of any character, or candy, or feigning an interest in their favorite thing. I understand the visceral disgust reaction to that type of artwork, but the fact of the matter is that it IS a valid coping tool, and it isn't inherently harmful, just like a knife isn't inherently harmful just because some people use it to kill instead of cut up food. It may sound ridiculous at first, comparing a knife with lolisho porn, but there are various uses for both. If people say that ONLY pedophiles can like lolisho, they're once again completely wrong. Pedophiles CAN like it, of course, but so can non-pedophiles. And as fucked up as it sounds, it can be used for healing purposes just as easily as predatory ones.

Something that I believe has no counter or debate is the simple fact that nobody can reliably know how dangerous someone is based on art alone. Multiple factors have to be considered, but I've already talked about that quite a bit in [this post], which includes an analogy I'm quite proud of having come up with, and a link a podcast hosted by two scientific individuals who discuss the topic of sex crimes and the role fantasies play in predicting them.

I also reject the notion that Ang should have "changed" and forced themself not to draw what they wanted. Putting aside the fact that holding in their self-expression was hurting them so much that it caused conflict within their DID system that resulted in some erratic behavior during the time, there's once again no factual or scientific or psychological backing behind the idea that someone who draws lolisho is drawing the "wrong" things or coping in an unhealthy way or harming anybody.

And I don't appreciate people like Ang's abusers, and less extreme individuals, trying to force their personal disgust onto others and moralizing it to create panic and fear of "proshippers". It's entirely based on knee-jerk reactions, some of which are valid! Some people have trauma with these topics, some people have been groomed specifically with taboo art, and—like you said—it is completely within someone's right to block anyone they want for whatever reason. It's this increasingly prevalent tendency for people to demand that EVERYONE ELSE conform to the same mold that pisses me off.

I do apologize if I have said anything repetitive or projected any opinions that you don't have onto you, or if I merely made tou uncomfortable! To be honest, I took a chance on this after glancing at your profile, and I did expect a MUCH worse reaction from you, so I appreciate you remaining civil thus far.

I also understand that this kind of thing is a lot to take in, and if you would like to talk further and maybe narrow the focus a bit, I can certainly try my best! (I find it extremely difficult to talk about any facet of this topic without touching other ones, and also it fatigues me a lot, but if someone is talking to me in good faith, then I'm inclined to put forth the effort.)

But for now, I would like to offer [this information database] I compiled, which I have been told has helped people understand my point of view before. I actually have a section that I think does a MUCH better job as conveying some of the viewpoints I summarized here, such as the "anything can be used for grooming" thing, because I understand how that can sound dismissive, and I don't intend to sound that way. I am very long-winded precisely because I want to make sure to consider as many angles as I can.

I certainly do believe that fiction does affect reality, sometimes significantly! But it's far more complicated than either proshippers or antishippers think it is, and the things I've seen have disillusioned me with the idea that this "anti-proship" thing does any level of good that isn't massively outweighed by the documented harm it has done and continues to do.

Also, I'm sorry if I've overwhelmed you! I do NOT expect you to read all that stuff I linked, let alone in one sitting. It's merely the best way I know how to provide backing to what I'm saying, and you're free to poke around and choose whatever you like, or choose none of it. It's up to you. :)

That's also why I didn't load this response up with more links despite making a lot of claims, because that would feel like Gish galloping just to "look smart" or something, which is not my goal. But if there's a specific claim you'd like me to provide the relevant sources for, I'm happy to do so!

Have a good day, and take care of yourself (which includes taking all the time you need to respond if you choose to respond at all). /gen

Alright, I'm gonna be louder about it now because the situation is dire. Ang/Vee (@/Atherist on Twitter) is in a terrible position, and they will die if nothing improves. They're in full survival mode, and that's not enough anymore. They NEED help. They need more money than I will ever have at once.

I don't know if they would want me giving details since they have locked their Twitter where they've posted about it, and I don't have enough of a reach to make any difference, so I'm going to look for people that do.

This is their Kofi. (https://ko-fi.com/handsomehugs)

They also have a subscription service (SubscribeStar seems to be preferred due to PayPal's... thing) where you can even unlock some content for your money.

https://subscribestar.adult/atherist

https://www.fanbox.cc/@atherist

But again, we need a wave of money, tens of thousands, just so they might live.

If anyone wonders why I would fixate on this one person even though lots of other people are struggling too, I'll be transparent and say, because it's not fair.

Everything that's happening to them is the long-term result of vicious abuse that ruined their career. It was intentional.

Horrible, vindictive, monstrous people DID THIS TO THEM. They did it out of spite, because they could, because they wanted a scapegoat for their own shitty friend drama, whatever. They lied and slandered them and stalked them and caused them IMMENSE trauma, and that. is not. FAIR.

If Ang dies, it will be THOSE people's faults. I don't care how long ago it was. They intended to, and succeeded in, taking away all the income and support they had, and PEOPLE NEED THOSE THINGS TO LIVE.

I will consider them murderers if Ang dies. And this outcome isn't fair.

Buhh buhh "life isn't fair", I know.

But I'm just doing what I can. It's all I can do. There's someone in front of me being killed and I can't just sit there and wait for it. Even if I fail to make a difference.

So I bring this attempt to paint a picture of WHY I care. Why I'm doing this.

I hate injustice. It tears me to shreds more than anything else on this earth. And if I can help, I WILL. I want to.

If Ang sees this: I promise I won't put myself in any financial trouble over this. I have a partner who wouldn't let that happen, and my bills are always paid. But I'm going to do everything I CAN. Because I want to. Because it's right. It's not a burden. You deserve better.

[wahbegan]

I believe abuse is an addictive behavior. People get a rush, a high out of that feeling of control, and they go chasing it. Not that i’m saying being abusive is a disorder of the mind that can be treated or something that should be approached with sympathy, far from it, i believe if i’m right here then it’s the only addiction i would categorically classify as a moral failing. But I think it’s helpful to get into the minds of abusers to examine the parallels between their pattern of abuse and say, substance use.

You have the honeymoon period slowly breaking down into sporadic, probably relatively minor acts of abuse, where someone first starts showing issues with their use. Consider it the functional alcoholic phase of being a wife-beater. 

Then the slow downward spiral where their acts become more extreme and their attempts to hold onto their partner more frantic and desperate, with repeated empty promises to change and grand acts of apology and threats of self-injury.

And finally rock bottom. Much as the bottle has consumed the drunk’s life, the semblance of a functional relationship and love is all but gone. There are hints of it here and there, perhaps, but at this point the abuse is constant and extreme, and the relationship held intact by fear of the abuser alone. 

This is a theory i just came up with having a cigarette so i probably need more time to flesh it out but think of the tolerance you build to a drug. Now think of how the man who is violent with his wife and/or children may start with one slap during an argument but will inevitably devolve into full beatings and/or sexual assaults, sometimes even murder.

Can this in any way be used to stop abusive behavior? I don’t know. I sort of doubt it. Abuse, like i said, may be the one addiction that is a moral failing. Because it is more complicated than a simple addiction. It’s easy to want to stop drinking or smoking crack, it puts YOU through Hell. But here, the brunt of the suffering of your downward spiral is placed squarely on another. So the only two inhibiting factors are conscience and fear of consequences.

Most abusers know that consequences for their actions are hard to catch and feel themselves invincible, and if conscience was an issue....well, quite simply, they wouldn’t have started in the first place.

To put it shortly, i believe a model of addiction treatment WOULD be helpful....but by far and away the vast majority of abusers simply have no desire to stop. Why would they?

This is why i think it’s a moral failing. I believe what people call an addictive personality is a disorder. I don’t think there’s any point in breaking it down farther than that. Sex addiction, alcoholism, crack, gambling, they are all different flavors of the same malfunction in your brain. That’s why so many of us have multiple addictions going on at the same time. Rare is the man who is a pure alcoholic or gambling addict and does nothing else addictive.

I believe we, as addicts, all choose to some degree, whether we realize it or not, what our poison is going to be. We get addicted to things we start out liking.

I was enamored with alcohol. Legal, easy to come by, comparatively safe (at least that’s what i believed at the time), socially acceptable, i could predict what it was going to do to me. It was grounded and reliable. And I like sex. I fucking love sex. I also hate sex, but I love sex. It boosts my self-esteem and makes me feel good. I honestly, shamefully, thought smoking was just plain old cool. These were the things that I clung on to. 

Most addicts who hurt others in the course of their addiction aren’t doing so on purpose, their morals are decaying as their DoC hijacks their brains’ survival center and makes getting a fix priority one, all other considerations secondary, friends and family expendable. 

But the addictive man who becomes hooked on abuse does so because he simply likes hurting people. 

But anyway, yeah, i think their bullshit runs on the same mechanism as addicts. Probably why there’s a lot of overlap. Alcohol can’t make someone abusive. Alcohol can’t force anyone to do anything they don’t already want to do sober. But an addict can easily pick alcohol and dishing out beatings as his two favorite flavors of addiction.

[inclusiveplurality]

How do you tell if you’re plural, did/osdd, or both? I am struggling to understand/comprehend the dsm criteria :(

ok, so we're definitely not experts. please take everything we say with a grain of salt, and seek multiple perspectives when you're questioning your identity like this. it's best to ask a ton of different people from all backgrounds--you'll get different answers depending on the cultural context and life experience of each person, and it's important to get as much information as you can in order to synthesize your individual understanding of your identity.

that said, here's our thoughts:

for us, plurality is extremely straightforward. we know who we are because of direct evidence: we extremely straightforwardly have entirely different identities; we connect to different names, have very strong senses of gender (and dysphoria), have things like favorite colors and songs and clothing styles, and can internally have conversations with each other. some of us are very similar to each other (having similar appearances, the same gender, or similar preferences/tastes), but there's still a fundamental sense of "i am a person who exists, i do not relate to any other people who exist in this body."

as we understand it, DID and OSDD can present like this, and sometimes there's overlap between a DID experience and a plural one. however, this is not the clinically typical DID experience, and it's fairly rare to encounter someone with DID or OSDD who experiences this.

some ways we've seen friends, people w/ DID/OSDD online, activists, and clinicians describe typical DID/OSDD presentations and experiences:

feeling like parts of you are "stuck in the past." switching between modes of behavior that are related to different times in your life. different alters perceiving the world through the lens of what was happening to them at certain times (one alter behaving as though they're still undergoing a specific trauma, another one behaving as though that trauma is over, for example).

having different "filters" through which your behavior and thoughts present. having distinct worldviews and perceptions that distort or filter your behavior and thoughts, which repeatedly occur (for example, "suicidal" and "executive functioning" could be two distinct alters, if those "modes" experience sufficient separation)

alters who identify directly as "identity at certain age or life stage." (for example, say the singletsona is named Jade--it's common for DID systems to identify as "high school Jade," "five year old Jade," etc--doesn't preclude using or identifying with different names, "high school Jade" could be named "Karen" and still identify as "high school Jade")

conflicting modes of thinking about the world and trauma that occur regularly (a very simplistic example could be "alter who doesn't feel their biofather is abusive," "alter who isn't emotionally affected by any form of trauma or abuse and feels numb as default," and "alter who's actively invested in therapy to heal from abuse their biofather put them through")

this isn't a comprehensive list or anything, but these are a few ways we've seen people with DID/OSDD and clinicians describe the most common presentation of the disorders.

as we understand, this experience can coexist with or underlie a more directly plural experience--parts/alters can identify as separate people and have distinct identities and preferences like our experience--but the underlying experience of parts that function as filters for behavior and thoughts, with the purpose of coping with trauma, is what characterizes DID/OSDD.

if anyone with DID/OSDD wants to add on with how you distinguish your experiences, please do and we'll reblog it--all of this information is secondhand from friends, activists, and clinicians, so firsthand experience is definitely welcome. however, please be friendly to plurals without DID/OSDD and don't try to armchair diagnose them, we do not play clinician to strangers on this blog.

--dave

[ninma]

A look at Dream's punishment through irl rules and taking into account UN's rules regarding prisons. Because it is just interesting and it proves how there is NO justification for it. But mostly because it's interesting to look at and you may learn a thing or two.

I have seen too many times people trying to justify Dream's punishment. I did research and read through multiple articles and documents (over 73 pages of two different documents) about the more legal sides of his punishment. While Quackity's physical torture is obvious, I am here to address that even before that it was still very illegal. I know it is fictional! This is just a look into the real life facts and rules regarding prisons because it is interesting to look at Dream's punishment and Pandora's Vault under the light of these. So keep that in mind while reading this!

Welcome to my ted talk with actual facts and be prepared for quite the ride!

While yes, he has done bad things...however he has not done something so bad that he deserves a punishment so cruel that it's considered too inhumane for even mass murderers. Like actually! Stay tooned and you'll see what I mean.

His sentence is indefinite solidary confinement. Which is defined by the united nations as:

"the confinement of prisoners for 22 hours or more a day without meaningful human contact."

This means his punishment fits the definition for all his time (including visits) except when Tommy was locked inn and now with Quackity (although I'd consider the last one a turn for the worse). Now that we have that cleared up- lets get into the rule breaking. But first, let me introduce you to The Mandela Rules!

"The Mandela Rules reinforce human rights principles, including

 the recognition of the absolute prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman

 or degrading treatment or punishment and effective guidance 

to national prison administrations for persons deprived of their liberty"

Now that we have established that, lets get into this concerning fact train!

Rule 43

1. In no circumstances may restrictions or disciplinary sanctions amount to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

The following practices, in particular, shall be prohibited:

(a) Indefinite solitary confinement;

(b) Prolonged solitary confinement;

(c) Placement of a prisoner in a dark or constantly lit cell;

(d) Corporal punishment or the reduction of a prisoner’s diet or drinking water;

(e) Collective punishment.

Yeah...pretty clear breaking of 4/5 there. They can't even break e! Not to mention the pretty explicit breaking of d that was probably a surprise. You can count it as them breaking 4/4 if you count the fact that they can’t even break e. Rest assured my friend, this is just the beginning.

Rule 44

For the purpose of these rules, solitary confinement shall refer to the confinement of prisoners for 22

 hours or more a day without meaningful human contact. Prolonged solitary confinement shall refer to 

solitary confinement for a time period in excess of 15 consecutive days.

Already broken this one too huh. Even visiting days counts because I don't think anyone has been there for hours and I also don't think Sam's interactions would be long enough or count as meaningful human contact. The time with Tommy and Quackity is the only time it dosen't count as solidary. So this is getting...very much concerinng. But this is still only the start.

Rule 45

1. Solitary confinement shall be used only in exceptional cases as a last

 resort*, for as* short a time as possible and subject to independent

 review, and only pursuant to the authorization by a competent authority. It

 shall not be imposed by virtue of a prisoner’s sentence.

2. The imposition of solitary confinement should be prohibited in the case

 of prisoners with mental or physical disabilities when their conditions

 would be exacerbated by such measures

Woops...so not only is it illegal as a punishment...but also the "he is a psychopath" argument (which is already a bad stereotype, but I won't get into psychology here. It's a common misconception and c!Tommy not knowing is almost to be expected. However please do not say that someone, character or real person, have a mental disorder or illness without proper knowledge about psychology and in the case of characters we shouldn’t put labels unless the writer has said that they have taken mental disorders or illnesses into account when making the character) just got yeeted out the window. Actually that argument just took a loop and now is an argument for the other side. It makes sense because as it says: it exacerbates their preexisting mental illnesses. Which is why it's prohibited. 

"In no case may a detainee’s contact with the outside world be

 dependent on his or her cooperativeness, be used as a disciplinary

 sanction or form part of the sentence."

  - Special Rapporteur on Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Civil and Political Rights, Including the Questions of Torture and Detention, ¶ 43, Comm’n on Human Rights,

“…The medical officer should visit prisoners held in solitary confinement

 every day, on the understanding that such visits should be in the interests

 of the prisoners ’ health. Furthermore, prisoners held in solitary

 confinement for more than 12 hours should have access to fresh air for at

 least 1 hour each day” - Subcomm. on Prevention of Torture [SPT]

Wow Sam...it is almost impressive in a dark way just how explicitly these are broken. The Warden's very punishments for disobedience just straight up counts as torture. And for the obvious record I highly doubt Quackity's daily visits to the green bloob counts as anything but 'the interests of the prisoners' health'. You can disagree here...but I am being very sarcastic.

Rule 22

1. Every prisoner shall be provided by the prison administration at the

usual hours with food of nutritional value adequate for health and

strength, of wholesome quality and well prepared and served.

Raw potatoes every day for the rest of your life..eehhh no thanks. If Dream ever gets out he will probably join me in the 'eating potatoes trauma' box. As funny as that sounds, it isn't a joke. I was force fed potatoes as a child and I hated it to the point where it gave me a mental block that stops me from eating them as my body just does not want to swallow it. It's a problem. But I can joke about it. Maybe Tommy will join us too, although it wasn't really the eating potatoes that caused that trauma...rip. Rest in anything but potatoes.

Rule 42

General living conditions addressed in these rules, including those related

to light, ventilation, temperature, sanitation, nutrition, drinking water,

access to open air and physical exercise, personal hygiene, health care

and adequate personal space, shall apply to all prisoners without

 exception.

I think it's pointless to say more on that topic as it's pretty much already summed up. Let us now move over to what are probably some of the qoutes so specific that it's scary.

“Furthermore, [the Committee] is concerned about the use of solitary

 confinement for indefinite periods of time.... Full isolation of 22 to 23

 hours a day in supermaximum security prisons is unacceptable

(art. 16).” - Committee. against Torture [CAT]

Oh wow.. talk about on the nose. I should've just started with this one as it pretty much says pretty clearly how it is unacceptable. Like yikes...can you get more specific? It is just downright ridiculous at this point. (-_-;)

“Solitary confinement, when used for the purpose of punishment,

 cannot be justified for any reason, precisely because it imposes severe

 mental pain and suffering beyond any reasonable retribution for

 criminal behaviour and thus constitutes an act defined in article 1 or article

 16 of the Convention against Torture, and a breach of article 7 of the

 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights."

Ahaha...ha....yeah for those who justify it...the convention against torture is very much against it being justified...Imagine if the characters could read these rules, that'd be interesting. Although I am pretty sure they don't follow realism for the imprisonment. As I have already said; this is just an interesting look at the irl rules and how Dream's punishment and Pandora's Vault stand under light of them.

“No prisoner, including those serving life sentence [sic] and prisoners on

 death row, shall be held in solitary confinement merely because of the

 gravity of the crime.”

 - Special Rapporteur on Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

Like...there are no loopholes here. It is so extremely clear that it truly is darkly impressive how the characters don't seem to have a second thought about this. How do you accidentally sentence someone to a lifetime of torture without realizing? If they do know...It'd be very dark.

Btw Tommy's exile and his time in prison doesn't count as solidary confinement. Just to clear that up.

It amazes me how badly they break these rules...I know they probably didn't take the realism into consideration. However it is still kind of darkly impressive. Especially considering how scary specific they break them too. Even though this is just a interesting (I was about to write fun, however I wouldn't count realizing how inhuman the prison is is 'fun'. But it is interesting) look at Dream's punishment and Pandora's Vault under the light of real life rules for prisons. (lol my paranoid self have said this so much)

These facts also proves how saying it's justified...is kind of morally bad. Not attacking anyone! I just want to also say how while it is pure fiction and the characters in the story can have whatever opinion they want as they are characters. However when it comes to fans approving and justifying it without taking time to consider how it really isn't something that can be justified (real or no). You can have whatever opinion you want, however just maybe take some of what you have learned today and reflect over it? To think twice after having received new information dosen't hurt. I am not here to tell you what to think, so rest easy. Only to share some facts^^ (*so obviously scared of offending anyone*)

I recommend taking some time to look it up yourself if you want to look further into it. The psychological aspects of it is also interesting to look at!

I hope you have learned something here today and found this post and my research interesting! I spent hours on this so I hope you have enjoyed this! I originally posted this on reddit and I was very surprised at how many stopped by to read it and therefore I choose to post it here as well because you learn something and hopefully also gained a new perspective. 

Ninma over and out!

[lmanberg]

Is Dream using a body double?

This post will include references to leaked images of both Dream and his brother and discussion of his old Reddit account, if you’re uncomfortable with that then do not read

TW/CW: weight & weight loss, dieting, eating disorder, scar mention, fatphobia, Dream’s ex (Sam), (verbal) abuse from a significant other

So before I get into it, I’m going to be talking about both a doxxing forum and Dream’s brother. I don’t want to say the name of either of them, so the forum will simply be called F and Dream’s brother will be called B.

There are five very different thought processes you can go through which will draw you to two very different conclusions, I’ll be talking about all of them and you can decide which you believe. I’d like to preface with the fact that I do not believe all of these theories and I’m just trying to explain all possibilities in this situation.

I will attach TLDRs at the end of every theory for convenience.

1. Dream is using his brother as a body double

So this is probably the theory you have seen discussed the most, but I’ll go into more detail as to why people believe this.

Firstly we start with Dream as a kid. We’ve already been shown an image of him by Dream:

Now there’s also a leaked image of “him”, in which he’s fat, fatter than he is in the image above. However his facial structure, smile, and hair are all the same. We can tell that Dream is 16 in the Facebook post that the image was found on. In the caption of the photo, Dream is called “Clay” and his father is in the image with him.

If we follow the theory, this would lead you to assume that Dream is still fat, and is using his brother as a body double for his merch photos. But why his brother?

There have been photos of Dream’s brother from his Instagram leaked on F, in one of these he’s holding a gun. The hand holding the gun has the exact same markings and scar as the hands in the unboxing video.

To continue talking about the unboxing video, the way he holds the objects and moves them off camera is also very suspicious. Just the audio quality already is weird, but then the way he moves items off camera and almost seems like he’s handing it to someone next to him, not to mention the obscene amount of cuts in the ending, it all extremely damning.

It’s pretty much undeniable that B is the person in the unboxing video, the scar being the most damning evidence. But what about the merch photos?

Firstly I will say that in the “face reveal” photos, Dream has the same markings on his arms as B and as he does in the unboxing video. But we can also talk about the hands in general:

As we can see, the hand in the bottom left has the same fingers as the one in the merch video, however the one in the bottom right (one of the more recent images of Dream) looks slightly different, in fact his hands look a lot more veiny and red. But we see his hand has similar veins in the image below, so it’s probably just lighting. The lack of tan is also to be expected, as the first image was pre-covid and the second was post, he hasn’t been able to see half as much sunlight as he used to.

TLDR: Dream is still fat and is using his brother as a body double

2. Dream is using his brother as a body double (V2)

So this theory has a similar thought process but deviates slightly.

In this theory, we assume that the leaked photo of Dream at 16 is him, but also that he has actually lost the weight.

Now at first you may think that’s a very drastic weight loss, however his old Reddit account had multiple posts on r/keto and even now he talks about how he has a very strict diet. A new piece of evidence came out during the recent podcast with George on his Discord, where they discuss whether or not a food had carbs in it. Dream gets audibly uncomfortable and changes the subject, whether to avoid triggering listeners or himself, we don’t know.

If Dream lost all the weight, why would he be using a body double? This I can’t explain, however the evidence of the merch photos being him is undeniable at this point. It’s possible he was in the process of losing weight and didn’t want people to see his weight loss, or maybe he weighs a little more than he feels confident in and feels more comfortable having his brother pose as him, but the weight difference isn’t so drastic that people would point it out when he face reveals.

Speaking of the face reveal; Dream vehemently denies that the kid in the photo is him, but if it is him and he didn’t lose that weight, he will be proven as a liar whenever he face reveals. This is the biggest flaw of Theory 1 in my opinion. At first Dream vagued the situation but never explicitly stated whether that specific picture was him or not, but now he has. There’s no logical explanation for Dream to deny that the kid is him, even though it is without a doubt him, unless he looks nothing like him anymore.

TLDR: Dream is using his brother as a body double, however he has lost weight

3. Dream is using his brother as a body double (V3)

This theory is the weakest in my opinion and is similar to Theory 2, with one deviation. There is a picture of Dream out there, and it’s a merch photo. In this theory we actually assume that the red merch photos are Dream, however the rest are B. Why?

First of all, this is (I believe) the first image we’ve ever seen of Dream (if I’m incorrect this theory is most likely void and you can stop reading now). In it, Dream weighs a slight bit more than he does in current photos, something we can see mainly in his thighs/hips, which I’ll attach below.

The date that the red merch photos released was 9/26/19, the date of his white merch photos was 7/21/20, and the release of the unboxing video was 6/4/20, giving Dream plenty of time to switch from taking the photos himself to then using his brother.

But why would he switch? We can guess it has something to do with Sam. According to Dream, Sam has tried to spread “false” info about him being obese before (which I would like to highlight, why obese? Why is that what she says, out of all insults? Most likely because he was, and just isn’t anymore).

This could have also intruded into their relationship as well as their breakup in the form of verbal abuse. Assuming that Dream was fat as a kid and later developed an unhealthy reliance on dieting and possible eating disorders to lose weight, it would make sense for him to be sensitive to rejection, especially from his girlfriend at the time, and stopped showing his body to the public.

We also know Dream and Sam’s relationship was very rocky in early 2020, therefore he may have had his brother pose for him on impulse to disprove the “slander” Sam was attempting to spread about his weight, and then decided that he preferred having B pose for him for one reason or another, most likely anonymity.

TLDR: Dream is using his brother as a body double in all photos except the red merch, he started using his brother after losing confidence in himself and his appearance.

4. Dream is NOT using a body double (V1)

From here on out, we become more critical of the images and information leaked by F. F is a forum known for their dislike of Dream. There are hundreds of people who use it for the sole purpose to hate Dream. The people in F are also generally homophobic, racist, sexist, etc., therefore it’s not a far reach to assume they’re fatphobic as well, and assumed that by spreading info that Dream is fat, they would cause him to lose support.

In this theory, we assume that the gun photo that I mentioned in Theory 1 is Dream, not B. We also assume that the photo of Dream at 16 is, in fact, Dream, but like Theory 2 states, he lost the weight.

By eliminating the hand evidence, there is almost no proof that the merch photos are not Dream. This would explain why Dream was so confident in denying that the kid in the photo was not him, because he looks nothing like him anymore.

In fact, this would also explain the weight loss between the red merch photos and the most recent photos of Dream. Dream was still dieting (or more) and therefore still losing weight. We all saw how much weight Sapnap lost by living with him for only a handful of months. Dream at 16 and Dream at 21 has a lot of weight to cover in only five years, it’s not unreasonable to assume that he was still in the process of losing weight in 2019 only to reach his current weight in 2021.

TLDR: Dream isn’t using a body double, F lied about the gun picture and it’s actually Dream

5. Dream is NOT using a body double (V2)

I will preface this by saying this is the theory I believe is most likely as of right now.

This theory is basically Theory 4 word for word, except we assume the white merch photos are not Dream and in fact B. Even before there were any body double theories, stans didn’t believe those pictures were Dream at first, mainly because of how much scrawnier he looks as well as his hair (not wavy OR blond).

An anon also claimed that when the photos first dropped, both George and Sapnap were streaming. Most people were watching George because Dream was in vc on that stream. In George’s stream Dream was repeating to chat that it is him and that chat is being dumb for saying it’s not. However, in Sapnap’s stream, Sapnap says that it’s not Dream. Sapnap is one of the only people who have seen Dream’s face (allegedly), and if Dream was fat or had already used his brother as a body double in merch photos (the red photos were released before the white) then he would know not to say anything.

But why would Dream lie? Most likely, his brother wanted to be in a merch photo and Dream just assumed that his fans would think it’s him. However they instantly began to call him out, and in order to protect his brother’s identity, he impulsively lied and said it was him. At that point he had gone too far and couldn’t back down without admitting he had lied.

TLDR: Dream isn’t using a body double, F lied about the gun photo and it’s actually Dream, however the white merch photos are B

—

And that’s it!

I probably won’t answer asks about this post because I really wore myself out writing it. I’d appreciate if anyone with a visible blog/on mcytblr didn’t reblog this and please do not repost this on any sites.

ALSO: This was written before the Sam photos leaked, some info may be outdated and I scrapped Theory 6 because of it

[justanothersyscourse]

Dear TPA and Stronghold System, STFU Sincerely, Someone genuinely concerned for every single person you come into contact with

So, we all know how much I dislike the TPA and the Stronghold System. They have a new thread on twitter! Let’s take a look and debunk it.

Now, first, I’ve already made a post about this topic (trauma as a cause). You can read it here, so I’m not going to go into TOO much detail. I just want to point out that using words and phrases that SOUND smart doesn’t make it correct.

We’ll make it quick and easy, go through it post by post.

I’ve always said trauma is personal, that it doesn’t need to be abuse, that it’s about the effects of the trauma, not the specific events. This isn’t a controversial statement. They’ve started this entire thread with a very misleading concept to get people on board. It’s statements like this that also mislead people into thinking “sysmeds” believe that it MUST be abuse. I don’t actually know anyone who actually believes that. If I ever met anyone who did, I’d smack them upside the head. 

To start, no age cap is mentioned because the DSM is a guideline-- a tool. It’s not a receipe book, it’s not the single source of all research ever. It contains info that can help clinicians make a diagnosis. The age of the trauma is irrelevant in this respect, so no, it doesn’t list a cap. ALL THE OTHER RESEARCH DOES, THOUGH. It also says, “in childhood”. There IS an age cap on “childhood”. A teen is not a child. In fact, the DSM doesn’t mention ANY other age except childhood in which the disorder develops. It talks about presentations in other ages, but not development. That alone should tell you something. 

Finally, “associated with” in this case, means clinically connected to. Short of traumatizing a bunch of children, that’s as close to 100% as we’re going to get.

This is where we start with things that sound smart. Correlation is... implied? A non-issue? Why is this coming up? I think the argument they’re trying to make is “correlation vs. causation”, but... In this case, trauma both correlates and causes? Like, the research proves it’s connected. Enough said.

Yes, it does. I don’t think you’re making the point you think you’re making.

OH BOY. Uhm. What kind of argument is this? No one is saying multiplicity is bad? It’s out of the ordinary? It’s a result that is caused by trauma? 

Honestly, they’ve already lost me. WTF. Why are you immediately implying “cause” is related to something negative? Your definition that you screencapped doesn’t say that. You’ve added this layer of negativity for no reason at all other than to guilt people and make a false argument.

LOL, okay, so this person, who has created this huge not for profit to “help” all these plurals is just... so misinformed and confused. Yes, lots of people are traumatized. Not all of them are traumatized for extremely long periods of time, years and years on end, and some people just... GENUINELY deal with stress and trauma better than others. There are also biological and mental factors that can increase someone’s likelihood of developing this disorder. It’s got to be a PERFECT STORM of things to result in DID. DID is not the norm, it’s the exception, so it’s EXPECTED that not everyone will end up with the disorder. 

Every. Single. Argument. They make here is just turning the truth around. That’s it. They’re not actually making any valid points, they’re just going, “YEAH, WELL”

None of the above points are true. 

It’s expected we won’t remember trauma, so no, it’s not included. Yes, that’s on purpose, based on the understanding that YOU WON’T REMEMBER. That would make diagnosis impossible. Also, it seems they’ve forgotten about OSDD here, which involves no amnesia. 

Trauma history is not a part of the screening process for DID/OSDD because it’s assumed that’s the ONLY cause. If the alters are truly present, trauma is implied and assumed. It doesn’t need to be proven.

Again, trauma is personal and can be seen on scans. That doesn’t mean we need to see it. For a group that preaches about taking people on their word, they’re kind of pissy when doctors do just that. As well, the ability to see it on scans is very new. Up until now we haven’t had that ability. Doctors are working with what they’ve got.

NO ONE IS ACTUALLY SUGGESTING THIS, STOP.

It is 99.99999% proven to be trauma, and we’re not going to traumatize children to get to 100%. There is ZERO reason to bring this up except to make “sysmeds” looks horrible.

You’re misunderstanding why this change was added to the DSM. In previous versions, switches needed to be seen by the diagnosing clinician, and it was letting people slip through the cracks. Personally, in all my years of therapy, I have never switched in that office. I’m so anxious and have so much to talk about that I get front stuck. Without this change, I never would have been diagnosed. This doesn’t allow for endogenics to exist, it allows for system to say “I’m experiencing this despite the fact that you’re not seeing it”. The “association with trauma” is still there. It hasn’t disappeared. 

What does this have to do with anything? 

Also, let’s take a look at this.

HMMMM, your numbers are a little off there, and obviously these words are being used in a variety of ways, so... you can’t just... say how many times a word is used and expect it to mean something. 

No, you’re not a doctor, so STOP IT. Obviously they choose the word associated because they want THAT specific connotation. Connected to. Related to. Corresponding with. Accompanied by. If you look at the thesaurus, it’s actually a synonym for “correlation”. Grow up. 

LMAO NO ONE IS DOING THIS??? HOLY FUCKKKK

No one is doing ANY of this. Saying “if you’re plural you have trauma” =/= “FIND THE TRAUMA, IMMEDIATELY”. It doesn’t need to be ethically studied, it’s already BEEN studied, the relation is there.

Okay, here’s something we can actually argue about. Except I already have, please see this thread. You are not experiencing cultural forms of multiplicity, and you’re gross for implying you are. 

Also, if this was the case, and endogenics existed, there WOULD be more information about them. Are you implying that clinicians have been aware ALL this time, BEFORE any of the research was EVER done??? OH WOW, IS IT TIMETRAVEL? IS IT CLAIRVOYANCE? OR ARE YOU JUST MISUNDERSTANDING THIS PART? As if the DSM knew about endogenics and excluded this “natural” multiplicity before the very first FMRI study was EVER CONDUCTED.