#theory of structural dissociation of the personality

[traumaanddissociation]

Actors role playing DID can be identified from differences in brain activation patterns, compared to people with DID - and brain activation patterns depend on whether an trauma holder alter / EP is in charge or a Apparently Normal Part / host - supporting the Theory of Structural Dissociation of the Personality (TSDP).

Multiple brain scan studies support structural dissociation, brain activation differences between alters, brain activation differences between people with DID and healthy controls or trained actors pretending to have DID.

Regions of the brain activated are those known to be associated with self-referencing and sensorimotor actions, but not the regions linked to imagination

Schlumpf YR, Reinders AATS, Nijenhuis ERS, Luechinger R, van Osch MJP, Jäncke L (2014) Dissociative Part-Dependent Resting-State Activity in Dissociative Identity Disorder: A Controlled fMRI Perfusion Study. PLoS ONE 9(6): e98795.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3791283/

[cambriancrew]

It's, scientifically speaking, not actually a theory, as theories contain a hypothesis that can be tested and proven, and structural dissociation can neither be properly tested for nor proven.

The proper scientific term for what it is, is a model. It explains things, the same way models of atomic structure explain the way atoms are set up.

But the same way pictures of an atom with the protons and neutrons clustered together in the middle with rings of electrons on the outside doesn't fully explain everything about atoms nor does it fully explain every kind of atomic and subatomic particle, neither does the structural dissociation model fully explain everything about every kind of system. Two of the three authors of The Haunted Self, the book on structural dissociation, have said explicitly that their model only pertains to dissociation and divisions of the personality in terms of trauma, and that dissociation even to the point of divisions of the personality like in structural dissociation occur in other contexts.

It's a useful model. But when people start trying to treat it like a real scientific theory that's been tested and proven, and try to force an understanding based on it in contexts it was never meant to explain, it falls short.

The theory of structural dissociation is a scientific theory

There is a difference between a scientific theory and a random person just coming up with something. Please learn this. A scientific theory has to be proven with research and evidence. Why do people seem to think it is just a random theory that some guy just decided to make up one day?

[unwelcome-ozian]

You should not assume that the adult who function in the world, or who presents to you, week after week, is the "real" person, and the other personalities are less real. The client who comes to therapy is not "the" person; there are other personalities to meet and work with. When DID was still officially called MPD, the "person" who lived life on the outside was known as the "host" personality, and the other parts were known as alters. These terms, unfortunately, implied that all the parts other than the host were guests, and therefore of less importance than the host. They were somehow secondary. The currently favored theory of structural dissociation (Nijenhuis & Den Boer, 2009; van der Hart, Nijenhuis, & Steele, 2006), which more accurately describes the way personality systems operate, instead distinguishes between two kinds of states: the apparently normal personality, or ANP, and the emotional personality, or EP, both of which could include a number of parts. p21” ― Alison Miller, Healing the Unimaginable: Treating Ritual Abuse and Mind Control

[sleepy-shutin]

welcome back to that dumbass pseudo-intellectual redditor ass tulpa doesn't know what the hell they're talking about.

this episode: self states and childhood imaginary friends in DID.

[hauntedselves]

Can childhood dissociation from emotions cause emotion bases alters (with their own names/personality traits that align with the emotion?)

Dissociation doesn't cause alters, trauma does.

Quote from the ISSTD Guidelines for Treating DID:

"Severe and prolonged traumatic experiences can lead to the development of discrete, personified behavioral states (i.e., rudimentary alternate identities) in the child, which has the effect of encapsulating intolerable traumatic memories, affects, sensations, beliefs, or behaviors and mitigating their effects on the child’s overall development."

So if you dissociated because of trauma, and part of that was denying/repressing your emotions, yes you could have alters that hold emotions.

[thescreamcorner]

I think this is a really interesting question to posit, and I will preface that I won't be providing much for sources because my answer fundamentally goes towards a difference in language to your question. I don't so much believe "endos aren't valid", but rather that the terminology and behavior associated with the plural community presents a lot of problems, given its common overlap with the online CDD community.

Belief of being "plural" that is tied to spiritual or cultural beliefs is explicitly listed in the DSM as a differential when considering a DID diagnosis, so even in the medical field "plurality" is, technically speaking, acknowledged as a cultural/spiritual experience that someone may identify with. I wouldn't argue that someone's spiritual beliefs are necessarily fake or delusion just because they don't align with my world view.

However, I've noticed in both endogenic plurality communities and even DID anti-endo spaces that validity culture has created a tendency for people to misrepresent, exaggerate or even fabricate symptoms, or misinform about what clinical presentations of DID/OSDD can/will look like. There's also been posts I've seen that, in trying to validate the spiritual side, completely disregard the possibility of someone experiencing genuine psychosis and needing help. I've seen BOTH sides become anti recovery and anti psychiatry in ways that are genuinely harmful to EVERYONE involved.

My focus regarding this subject is less about proving whether or not endos are real, and more about advocating for better separation between spaces for complex dissociative disorders and spaces for plurality, as they are two very different types of experiences with far less actual overlap than is presented by the crowd that treats DID as just an "alter disorder."

i have a question for anti endos

before you answer my question, i also have a few requirements for the answer to be valid.

my question is simple. why are endos not valid ?

my requirements for the answer are-

do NOT say that it is because they are faking DID, because endo’s don’t claim to have DID. endogenic plurality is plurality without DID.

you HAVE to be plural or questioning to answer this. no singlets. i do not give a single fuck what singlets think when it comes to the validity of certain systems.

you HAVE to provide sources. if your claim has no evidence i will not listen to it.

you can’t just say “because i don’t agree” or “because they just aren’t”, you have to give an actual reason. also no “because we have DID”, we also have DID. that’s not a reason.

i look forward to your answers !

[syllvarin]

Non-traumagenic plurality: How could it be possible?

First off, let's start with what some anti-endo folk mean versus what they don't mean with traumagenic plurality

They mean systems caused by/as a response to trauma and traumatic events, and those who are still affetced by them, aka systems who are disordered, DID/OSDD/UDD.

What they don't mean is systems who have trauma in their origin along with other causes. They do not believe a system can very well be traumagenic but function smoothlessly due to recovering, or have multiple origins.

Note: We are a diagnosed DID system with mixed (trauma/ramcoa/neuro/para) origins. Yes, we know what we are talking about. No, that doesn't mean we can't do mistakes, but we will try our best to be as accurate as possible. We will include scientific articles, DSM-5 DID checklist, and many more in this post.

How can that be possible?

1st: Brains are quite complicated. Research on brain functions is far from being complete, it is a long road that we are still at the very beginning of. We still don't know how brain exactly works let alone how it can form seperate conscious identities and work them together. We do know headmates exist based on brain MRI's ( link here ) That proves us that systems indeed, exist.

2nd point i want to make is that science is not done in a linear fashion. We are studying to be neuroscientists ourselves and the very core of what makes science doable is MONEY. Yes, in this capitalist system even the most seemingly basic research requires funding, money, and a goal that can be monetized to get done. Reseaches on female autonomy, rare disorders and "demonized" disorders such as DID is therefore not often as it is not easily capitalized and funded.

Therefore we do not have enough research to prove or disprove that the only way of becoming a system is through childhood.

And that brings me to my 3rd point, where we will take a look at what DSM-5 (The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition) says about diagnostic crietria of DID. We will see how it is a dissocative disorder, not a trauma disorder.

Found under dissociative disorders (not trauma disorders!), checklist for DID is as follows:

See how none of those checklist include trauma as checklist? Yes DID is commonly caused by trauma but not always. Yes it commonly is created during childhood but not always. Those arent in diagnostic criteria.

Definitive feature is not trauma, it is distinct personality states or experience of possession.

DID is associated with traumatic events, does not mean it requires it.

DID can manifest at almost any age (DSM-5 is saying that, folks)

What's more is OSDD doesnt even have a definitive checklist like DID. it is found under differential diagnosis, with other disorders. PDID (partial DID where one part is frontstuck a majority of the time) is also up to psychiatrist's evaluation rather than a concrete checklist.

4th point is : What about Structural Dissociaton Theory?

This theory is as it goes: The theory of Structural Dissociation works off of the assumption that everyone is born with different ego states that later merge in life. Those different ego states operate for different actions in life, that later integrate into one person during ages of 4-6. Trauma disrupts that integration and causes ANP (apparently normal parts) and EP (Emotional parts). EP's are stuck in the trauma while ANP's are not.

source: The Haunted Self: Structural Dissociation and the Treatment of Chronic Traumatization" by Onno van der Hart, Ellert Nijenhuis, and Kathy Steele. 

Yes, theory. Theories are not concrete. They can be disapproved, they can change, they may not fit every experience. Structural dissociation only explains how DID can manifest at childhood, but we already know by now that DID can manifest at almost any age.

So I personally think basing everything on a theory about how DID might've been caused (which doesn't even perfectly explain every possible way) is not as fault-proof as one might think it is.

Point 5: experiences of "multiple identities" exist for so long into history (people who are possessed, talk to themselves, act weird at times, are very different at times, etc), way before any DID/OSDD terms were created. And actually, how can we know how many people in history have had this experience when the very society we are in is very scared of them? It is fair to say only the disruptive cases must've been noticed, and majority of them probably were either deemed as crazy or exorcised as they believed those people were possessed by spirits. Just because your experience does not fit with others and just because science hasnt done anything to back them up, doesn't mean people's lived experiences are false. Why would so many people tell that they are a system when they are not? We are not living in a place where being a system is happy or fun, we are not in a society where its profitable or anything. It literally gives a person zero + points for being plural if they arent. It would be a nonstop roleplay they have to keep up throughout every aspect of their life; and at that point, it must be either impossible or that person is already plural and not roleplaying when no one is looking at them.

Creating headmates is on the same basket. A person with DID can create headmates in blink of an eye (we know from oursleves) sometimes splitting threshold is so low you may split off multiple people at once. You cannot know what is going in a person's mind, and what mechanisms work for creating a headmate. If they claim they did, it is very much no chance they are faking being different people 24/7. It *is* a real chance that they actually did develop a headmate. If you do not believe them; ask them about their experiences. I am %100 positive that if you actually listen to them, you will see those people are only trying to live their life.

Also, if you think healthy systems cannot exist and only way to be a system is through dissociation and dysfunction; then why would DID systems try to heal anyway? Wouldn't that just be sanist and ableist to expect all of them to turn into singlets because healthy multiplicity isnt a thing?But no, it is a thing, and healthy multiplicity and recovery is possible for systems. DID and other disordered forms of plurality do indeed exist, and they are indeed, treatabe in multiple ways according to what a person feels comfortable with. That is also a system's right to heal however they please. They don't owe anyone their right to stay as plural or become a singlet.

6th point I want to make is about: Why do we even care?

If a person says they have multiple people in their head, why do we care and tell them they are faking? They are not claiming to have a diagnosis, even if they did; if their situation is causing a distress to them, then they ARE diagnosable and that therefore is none of our business, again.

Last point I want to make is how endogenic DID is possible. yes, possible. remember how trauma is not in diagnostic criteria and DID can happen at any age? If endogenic plurals can happen, they can also form DID at later in life. They can also become disordered due to an event in their life. They can lose harmony and become so dysfunctional they need professional help. That doesn't mean they are no longer endogenic or some other origin, that simply means their state is different than what it was and they need help.

End of our post. Thank you for reading.

[sophieinwonderland]

Here's Ableist AspenFrostEN Trying To Pack as Much Misinformation and Ableism As She Can Into One Minute:

This sentence is, perhaps, the one and only true thing in this entire video.

Oh, please do enlighten me, Aspen!

I mean, sure, created systems are a thing. Tulpas are the main example of this and the ones that have been studied the most. But there are created systems that aren't tulpas, such as in daemonism.

Also, plenty of traumagenic DID systems have intentionally created alters too, so it's weird to make "people who believe that you can force yourself to have alters" an endogenic system thing.

ALSO, basically no tulpagenic system I know actually uses the word "alter" to describe their headmates.

While most endogenic systems are plural without a disorder, it's bizarre to use this as your definition instead of just "an endogenic systems is plural without trauma" as it's actually defined.

Founded entirely on Tumblr???

Aspen, dear...

Are you... capable of reading? Here's the paragraphs you're looking at. Notice how it says natural system predated the word endogenic?

Yes, the word endogenic was first used on Tumblr... as a replacement of "natural system" or "natural multiple" that dated back to the 90s, before you were even born!

Here's one site mentioning natural multiples in their glossary in 2003:

And here's the origin in a page dated for 1998:

You clearly know NOTHING about the plural history that you're rambling on about.

And how am I only 20 second into this???

What do you consider a medical consensus again?

The World Health Organization's ICD-11, the diagnostic handbook used around the world, explicitly states that you can experience multiple "distinct personality states," the characterizing feature of DID according to it, without having a mental disorder:

That's the World Health Organization's official handbook!!!

I'm not sure what more of a consensus you need.

But I'll add that Tulpamancy is acknowledged as a real psychological phenomenon by Dr. Samuel Veissiere, psychiatry professor at McGill University.

And Dr Eric Yarbough, Distinguished Fellow of the American Psychiatric Association has stated that you can be plural without trauma or a disorder in a book reviewed and published by the American Psychiatric Association.

And these claims are undisputed. There is no peer reviewed paper by any psychiatrist that has claimed you need trauma or a mental disorder to be plural.

Now, onto the next round of misinformation!

I recognize that page! That's DID-research! A glorified blog that convinced an entire generation that OSDD-1a and OSDD-1b were actual medical terms for disorders they could be diagnosed with!

(Spoiler: The aren't!)

Is that so?

It would probably be really inconvenient for this narrative if the creators of the theory of structural dissociation ALSO have said it may be possible people to form self-conscious dissociative parts of the personality without trauma, huh?

I mean, something like that would just completely destroy everything you're trying to sell and make you look even more like a hack who has no idea what she's talking about, wouldn't it?

...

...

...

This paper is by two of the authors of the Haunted Self, which I probably shouldn't need to tell you since you're so knowledgeable about plurality, is the book that created the theory of structural dissociation of the personality.

Even the creators of the theory you're citing are saying plurality could have other causes.

Wouldn't that require you to actually know what endogenic systems actually believe? Or, you know, literally anything about plural history? Or anything at all? 🤔

Now we're back to ableist Aspen having no idea what Schizophrenia is and using it as an insult. 🙄

Aspen is not hiding her intent. Her goal is to spread hate, to come into our communities and bully us.

Aspen is a liar, a bully and an abuser.

But I hope I've also demonstrated pretty thoroughly that on top of that, she also incredibly ignorant.

She's ignorant of psychiatry. She's ignorant of plural history.

Every word out of her mouth on this topic is a lie she made up, and hopes her followers will be gullible enough to swallow, because while she may act confident in her misinformation, the fact is that she doesn't know anything about what she's talking about.

[orange-orchard-system]

Lately my mind keeps drifting to that phenomenon of people getting really into hypno videos that would claim to be able to hypnotize you into thinking you were someone completely different, and all the people who reported that it worked for them. Except later they would report that sometimes they would suddenly shift into this other identity at inopportune times even when there was little or nothing to trigger the hypnosis. All this was especially common for hypno videos focused on specific medias such as MLP:FIM (this phenomenon is probably best known for occuring in this fandom, in fact), but I've also seen people saying the same for hypnosis regarding real or mythological creatures. And I am also thinking about those authors of the Structural Theory of Dissociation of the Personality (leading theory on how DID develops) saying that a similar phenomenon to the division of self/personality in DID could possibly occur through other means like hypnosis. And how hypnogenic is a very niche origin term that exists.

... Anyway I hope all those folks who probably accidentally made themselves into systems (or at the very least, gave their unknown kintypes a weirdly strong boost) by watching hypno videos are doing well.

[guardianssystem]

Tumblr Post of our Endogenic and Non-traumagenic Plurality Research

EDIT: THIS POST IS OUTDATED COMPARED TO THE LINKED DOCUMENT. PLEASE CHECK THE DOCUMENT FIRST. THANK YOU

Endogenic & Non-Traumagenic Plurality

By Guardians System, a diagnosed traumagenic DID system with PTSD and CPTSD

For use by everyone, to be read by EVERYONE

Brought to you by sysmeds who say “I’m not reading all that” (/j)

Feel free to DM on Twitter at GuardiansSystemOpen for anonymous questions on Tellonym also under GuardiansSystemOtherwise, just comment! :)

Lists of Links

Put together by community members! (Not thoroughly checked)

Plurality/Multiplicity + Syscourse Resources and Findings

Pastebin by ButterflyBlood - contains info from the DSM-3 to the DSM-V, medical info, community info, Tulpa info, syscourse info, and a video

Cambrian's Thread of Experts

Thread by the Cambrian Crew - contains info from Dr Eric Yarbrough (Distinguished Fellow of the American Psychiatric Association), info from Dr Nijenhuis and Van Der Hart (two of the writers of the Theory of Structural Dissociation), info from the ICD-11 and DSM-V-TR, and an interview by Dr Richard Loewenstein (lead editor of the DSM-V’s section on DIssociative Disorders)

Studies into non-disordered and/or endogenic plurality

Pastebin by Oliviaset - contains multiple science/government links and a video

Collected Plurality Info - 8 pages of resources - Fractal System

Document by The Fractal System - contains explanations on multiple types of plurality and references links to each, contains community info, history info, academic info, and more

Scientific Papers on Endogenic Plurality - r/Plural

Post and comments by numerous systems/supporters - contains a massive amount of uncategorised links to all types of information on non-traumagenic plurality

Multiplicity Links - SARAH K REECE

Site by Sarah K Reece - a previously diagnosed traumagenic DID system that no longer fits the criteria but is still a system, links focus mainly on general helpful system information

Scientific Articles on Nondisordered Systems

Document by Tabellenblatt1 (?) - contains info specific to non-disordered plurality, including the interview by Dr Richard Loewenstein

Ex Uno Plures - Articles

Community site by Plures House - contains explanations on plurality, info on living plural, info on personal experiences, medical info, philosophical info, social info, and syscourse info

An Endogenic Proof Masterlist - Plural Anomaly

Document by Plural Anomaly - contains community info, academic info, and criticisms on the Theory of Structural Dissociation

Plurality Studies - Multiplicity and Plurality Wiki

Wiki made by numerous community members - contains uncategorised abstracts from medical info and info on Tulpas

Non-Traumagenic & Endogenic System Information

General medical/clinical studies and research

It's just a body: A community-based participatory exploration of the experiences and health care needs for transgender plural people

Study by numerous people including a system - repeatedly references and explains multiple types of plurality, both traumagenic and non-traumagenic

Multiplicity: An Explorative Interview Study on Personal Experiences of People with Multiple Selves

Study by numerous people - uses some outdated language, however, explores how systems exist both with and without Dissociative Identity Disorder

Conceptualising multiplicity spectrum experiences: a systematic review and thematic synthesis

Study by numerous people - explores how multiplicity exists outside of Dissociative Identity Disorder in a medical context in order to recommend appropriate health services

Critiquing the Requirement of Oneness over Multiplicity: An Examination of  Dissociative Identity (Disorder) in Five Clinical Texts (Alternative Link)

Study by Kymbra Clayton - explains how multiple selves can be healthy without the need for singularity

NORMAL DIMENSIONS OF MULTIPLE PERSONALITY WITHOUT AMNESIA

Study by multiple people - uses slightly outdated language, describes how multiplicity can be considered natural without the dissociative disorders, and how the dissociative disorders could simply be expanding upon multiplicity

Cognitive processes in dissociation: An analysis of core theoretical assumptions

Study by numerous people - discusses potentially healthy dissociation and the existence of dissociation without trauma

MODES OF EXISTENCE: TOWARDS A PHENOMENOLOGICAL POLYPSYCHISM

Study by Mick Cooper - discusses alternative ways for multiple selves to exist

A plurality of selves? An illustration of polypsychism in a recovered addict

Study by Peter T.F. Raggatt - discusses the normality of non-traumagenic multiplicity and different ways for natural plurality to exist

A Jungian Perspective on the Dissociability of the Self

Study by Brian R. Skea - includes multiple mentions of Freud, extremely explicit and triggering language, and repeated use of outdated terms, however helps to provide an understanding of much older views on non-traumagenic dissociation and plurality

TRANSGENDER Mental Health - chapter 11

Book by Dr. Eric Yarbrough of the American Psychiatric Association - states repeatedly throughout the chapter that plurality is only a part of dissociative identity disorder and exists without the disorder, as well as trauma only being reported in some cases of plurality and that trauma is not the only cause for plurality, and states that plurality itself is only a collection of alters

"I've Learned to Treat my Characters like People": Varieties of Agency and Interaction of Writers' Experiences of their Characters' Voices

Study by multiple people - describes authors’ common experience of accidental multiplicity caused by their characters gaining autonomy

Dissociation in Trauma: A New Definition and Comparison with Previous Formulations

Article by Ellert R S Nijenhuis and Onno van der Hart (two of the writers of the Theory of Structural Dissociation) - page 27, at the end of the article, they recognise mediumship and similar practices as a “division of personality,” which is what they refer to the dissociative disorders as

Exploring the Experiences of Young People with Multiplicity

Research by Zarah Eve and Sarah Perry - begins with multiplicity only sometimes being applicable for a DID/OSDD diagnosis, and continues that multiplicity itself and the dissociative disorders are not the same, as well as some respondents not associating their multiplicity with trauma alongside the dissociative disorders not applying to some of the respondents, and having a section for some multiplicity not being based in trauma

Comparison of Brazilian spiritist mediumship and dissociative identity disorder

Study by multiple people - in comparing Dissociative Identity Disorder with Brazilian Spiritist Mediumship, it was found the two shared very similar results, only that the Mediumship results appeared slightly healthier than DID

Tulpamancy

Studies and research specifically on Tulpas, though can apply to other plurality

Tibetan Buddhist with a Tulpa - Opinion on Plurality

Post by Dharma Yokeyodasampa - a Tibetan Buddhist with a more traditional Tulpa asking community members for questions, discussions include what they think about plurality, western Tulpamancy, how their Tulpa feels, and the difference between western Tulpamancy and the Tibetan practice. (This is a post compiling and explaining most of it, with a response from Dharma.)

Personality Characteristics of Tulpamancers and Their Tulpas

Study by multiple people - examines and explores what Tulpas are, what they do, their role, Tulpa experiences, some history, and more

Sentient companions predicted and modeled into existence: explaining the Tulpa phenomenon

Study by Kaj Sotala - describes a theory on how Tulpas may be psychologically caused via “feedback loops” (can also be applied to various other types of plurality, such as multiplicity caused by authors/artists and caused by other disorders)

A Time for Tulpas

Thesis by Nick Stager - discusses what a Tulpa is, experiences with Tulpas, the development of Tulpas, how other practices may be similar, how an author can accidentally create Tulpas, and more

Tracking the Tulpa - Exploring the "Tibetan" Origins of a Contemporary Paranormal Idea

Book by Natasha L. Mikles and Joseph P. Laycock - explains what Tulpas are, how Tulpas are created both intentionally and unintentionally, some of the history behind Tulpa, and Tulpas based on theosophy instead of the Tibetan practice

Tulpas and Mental Health: A Study of Non-Traumagenic Plural Experiences

Study by Jacob J. Isler - explains what Tulpamancy is and how it can differ from Dissociative Identity Disorder but still be plural 

Paranormalizing the Popular through the Tibetan Tulpa: Or what the next Dalai Lama, the X Files and Affect Theory (might) have in common

Article by Ben Joffe - explains what Tulpas are, how Tulpas develop, Tulpa experiences in the outside world, the difference between Tulpamancy and the Tibetan practice, some of the history behind Tulpas, Theosophy-related Tulpas, and Tibetan Sprulpa experiences

Making Friends - Transcript of a Podcast on Tulpas

(Slightly incorrect: more info here) Discussion by multiple people - explains multiple personal experiences with a Tulpa, actions of a Tulpa, accidental creation of Tulpas through writing, Tulpas taking over the physical body, Tulpas having a different identity, purposeful creation of Tulpas, discussions with professionals (Richard J. Loewenstein,) the difference between Tulpas and psychosis, the similarity between Tulpas and Dissociative Identity Disorder, how without distress then it can’t be disordered, and more

Daring to Hear Voices

Dalai Lama - Buddhist practices are open to those who need them

Clinical Information

Helpful medical information not specifically related to non-traumagenic systems

DID Brain Pattern Study Doesn't Measure Up - December 2018

Critique by Spot&Cerberus - discusses the multiple flaws with the MRI scan on DID patients

Moral Status and the Treatment of DID Study by Timothy J. Bane - discusses the current known treatments for DID in the context of integration being commonly used, how it may be unethical and unhealthy to force integration, and that a multiple can healthily exist

DID, OSDD, and UDD Diagnostic Guide (NZ)

Diagnostic guide by ACC (Accident Compensation Corporation) - the New Zealand guide to diagnosing patients with DID, OSDD, and UDD, includes history of the diagnosis, problems with the diagnosis, alternative diagnoses, requirements for a diagnosis, what to avoid in a diagnosis, what to look for in a diagnosis, and similar

The Theory of Structural Dissociation

Theory by multiple people - the most commonly used theory to explain dissociation, often specifically related to dissociative disorders

Problems with the Theory of Structural Dissociation

Research by multiple people - discusses multiple problems with the Theory of Structural Dissociation, including it being a theory, the discarding of derealisation, depersonalisation, dissociative fugue, dissociative amnesia, the lack of association with trauma and PTSD in the DSM-V, and proposes some different ideas

ICD-11 for Mortality and Morbidity Statistics

Book by the World Health Ogranisation - Dissociative disorders on 6B64

DSM DID ALTERATIONS

DSM-V-TR

DSM-V (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition)

Book by the American Psychiatric Association - Dissociative Disorders on page 336

DSM-IV-TR

DSM-IV

DSM-III-R

DSM-III

DSM-II-SPECIAL

DSM-II

DSM-I-SPECIAL

DSM-I

Plural History

Explanations and references to different parts of plural history

Plural History - 1811

Collection by Lb Lee - contains multiple parts of history in which systems of all types have existed (there are 4 different chapters)

A Partial History of Plural Self-Advocacy

Collection by Alt H - describes times in history starting from 1987 when non-traumagenic plural advocacy was recorded

It's Not Just a Tumblr Thing - Kerry Dawkins

Article by Ex Uno Plures - contains references in history to plurality outside of and before Tumblr

A Brief History of the Use of "System" in a Non-DID Space

Collection by Lb Lee - describes the history of the word “system” being used to describe those with multiple selves, and how it isn’t a disorder-specific term

A Quick'N'Dirty History of "System" as Plural Slang

Collection by Lb Lee - explains the history of the word “system” and the different uses

"Endogenic" was not coined by Freud

Collection by Sophie in Wonderland - a discussion on the anti-endos claim that “endogenic” was coined by Freud

Origin of the term Endogenic

Explanation by the Lunastus Collective - details how the term “endogenic” came to be created, what led up to it, and what happened after

I saw a post saying we should just believe RAMCOA surivors... okay... so how about this one?

Explanation by Sophie in Wonderland - describes how and why anti-endos think “system hopping” was stolen by endogenic systems from RAMCOA systems, including an explanation from the RAMCOA system that anti-endos reference

Community Explanations

Explanations on endogenic plurality by community members (sources are used)

Debunking the Anti-Endo Carrd - Guardians System

To be updated

What do Sysmeds say That is Transphobic/TERF Rhetoric?

Post by multiple people - a discussion on the comparison of sysmeds and transmeds, and how their arguments and the language they use is the same

Why Not Just Use Thoughtform?

Collection by Sophie in Wonderland and Olivia Set - describes why some parogenic systems prefer using Tulpa over Thoughtform 

Debunking Sysmeds - Claims and Rebuttals

Carrd by Ozymandias& - lists claims that anti-endos make against endogenic systems, and critiques the claims alongside referencing studies

I would define a plural system as having multiple, compartmentalised, self-conscious agents - SophieInWonderland

Collection by Sophie in Wonderland - an explanation of the validity of endogenic and non-traumagenic systems complete with referenced research and studies

Studies and Research into Endogenic and Non-Disordered Plurality

Masterpost - Academia on Endogenic and non-traumagenic plurality

Post by Inclusive Syscourse - contains an explanation on the validity of endogenic and non-traumagenic plurality complete with referenced research

Claims There is No Research On Endogenics

Post by Unknown - a list of research on endogenic and non-traumagenic plurality alongside explanations and descriptions

Origins of Plurality and Levels of Dissociation

Study by The Phoenixes - uses the DES to gain insight into plurality not caused by trauma

The Tulpa Carrd - explain the nature and origins of Tulpamancy and what surrounds it

Carrd by Unknown - lists an explanation and some history of Tulpamancy alongside references to research

Likely Origins of "Tulpamancy is Cultural Appropriation"

Post by the Dragonheart System - critiques a Carrd claiming that Tulpamancy is cultural appropriation, referencing research and studies

Resources

General helpful resources for all systems

Multiplicity Wiki - A wiki by plurals and multiples, for plurals and multiples

Wiki by multiple people - contains terms, definitions, and general information on all types of plurality and multiplicity

Layman's Guide to Multiplicity

Guide by Unknown - contains terms, definitions, information, explanations, and experiences on multiple types of plurality

The Plural Association - For Dissociative Identity Disorder & all other forms of Multiplicity under the Plural umbrella

Organisation by the Stronghold System (?) - contains help sites for all types of struggling systems, alongside helpful information and articles on multiple areas

Pluralpedia - the collaborative plurality dictionary

Dictionary by multiple people - contains a massive amount of information on the majority of plural terms and history

Endogenic Hub -  a site dedicated to endogenic plurality

Hub by the Hordes System - contains information and experiences on multiple types of non-traumagenic plurality, alongside explanations of what plurality is

More Than One - Plurality (or multiplicity) is the existence of multiple self-aware entities inside one physical brain

Site by Unknown - contains information on terms, different system origins, denounces myths about plurality, and different plural experiences

The Dissociative Initiative - For, by, and about people with multiplicity, dissociation, and amnesia

Run by Sarah K Reece - a support group for systems that contains different information and resources on plurality

Tulpa Info - "For Science"

Guide by Unknown - multiple different languages, explains what a Tulpa is, why they can exist, and where to begin when making a Tulpa

FAQ

If you’re a sysmed, you might end up here! Congrats if you do!

What is a system? A system is anyone who has more than one entity/identity in the body/brain. 

What is plural/multiple? They mean pretty much the same as "system", only "plural" was made exclusively to be inclusive of every experience that involves many in the same body. E.g. if someone is an anti-endo or sysmed and uses the hashing "plural" to find friends, they're going to attract inclusive folks who support endos.

What is DID? DID stands for Dissociative Identity Disorder. It is a disorder in which a system experiences severe dissociation that heavily impacts their life on a day-to-day basis.

What is OSDD? OSDD stands for otherwise Specified Dissociative Disorder and is used when they experience similar symptoms to DID but are missing one of the diagnostic criteria. E.g. OSDD-1A is used when there's a lack of distinct identities or no identities. OSDD-1B is used when there's a lack of memory gaps. (The separate OSDD categories don't properly exist as a diagnosis themselves - they are carried over from DDNOS.)

What is UDD? UDD stands for Unspecified Dissociative Disorder. It's often used as a placeholder diagnosis by professionals to say that although there is a dissociative disorder, they're not sure what it is.

What is a non-disordered system? A non-disordered system is a system without DID, OSDD, or UDD. They don't experience the disorders or do not fit the criteria. 

What is traumagenic, endogenic, mixed-origins, etc.? Traumagenic is a system that is formed from trauma. Endogenic is a system that is formed without trauma. Mixed-origins is a system that has multiple origins, E.g. some alters came from trauma and some did not.

What is a Tulpa? A Tulpa is a created identity that comes from repeatedly feeding information on one character or multiple characters into the brain. It can be purposeful or accidental.

DID/OSDD/UDD are trauma disorders? The diagnostic criteria for the disorders don't include trauma being necessary, nor does it anywhere else in the category. Trauma disorders and dissociative disorders are also categorised separately, and there are past studied cases of DID that weren't caused by trauma. The DSM-V-TR also includes a section that states trauma isn't necessary for a diagnosis.

You need trauma to be a system? The DSM-V specifies that a diagnosis of DID cannot be applied to cultural plurality. Culture-related plurality has existed and been documented for centuries, erased by colonisation and racism. Common cultural plurality includes Tibetan Buddhism, many Two-Spirit folk, medians, and mediums. These and more are all plural.

Dissociation is a trauma reaction? You’ll find nearly every if not every professional refers to some dissociation as “trauma-related dissociation” - take, for example, Kathy Steele, one of the writers of the Theory of Structural Dissociation, whose work consists almost only of “trauma-related dissociation”. That wouldn’t be necessary if dissociation only came from trauma. Dissociation is commonly shown to exist both inside and outside of other disorders. It’s especially common in BPD, ADHD, MADD, autism, and a few other disorders.

So only cultural and spiritual plurality can be non-traumagenic? They’re the most well-researched, but not the only non-traumagenic plurality. There are a few different theories as to how other plurality can form. Many experience their plurality caused by mostly unrelated disorders - autism, ADHD, BPD, Bipolar Disorder, MADD, etc. Others report accidentally creating alters, especially those who focus on characters, such as writers, artists, and authors. Yet more simply say they were born with their plurality, or grew up being plural without trauma being the cause. We believe plurality that hasn’t existed since birth could be caused by a “feedback loop” (here) in which one’s brain, after being fed repeated information, begins to predict the information, therefore creating actions to fill that prediction. This could be used to explain Tulpamancy (repeated info), artists/authors/writers (repeated info), ASD (masking and special interests), ADHD (masking and hyperfixations), BPD (splitting and more), MADD (repeated info), Bipolar (different states), and so on. 

Endogenic systems harm traumagenic systems? We and others have asked multiple times for sysmeds to tell us why they think endogenic systems hurt them, and every time we’ve either received silence or something that’s already been covered. Besides that, anti-endos hurt other traumagenic systems with their BS far more than endogenic systems might hurt them.

Anti-endos hurt traumagenic systems? Yup, and very frequently, considering sysmeds repeat the exact same information. Sysmeds say you have to be disordered to be a system - traumagenic systems exist without being disordered. Sysmeds say endogenic systems stole traumagenic terms - a mix of the communities coined the majority of system terms, and “endogenic” was coined by a traumagenic system. Sysmeds say what someone went through isn’t traumatising or horrific enough - traumagenic systems can be caused by any amount of trauma, no matter how “insignificant” it seems. Sysmeds repeatedly tell endogenic systems they need to have trauma - telling someone they have to have trauma when they either don’t or have amnesia around it can be incredibly damaging and has hurt many traumagenic systems. Sysmeds say they need to go to a psychologist or a therapist and be diagnosed - many traumagenic systems can’t be diagnosed. Many endogenic systems have trauma, just know they weren’t formed from it, and anti-endos repeatedly mock them about having trauma. There’s much, much more, but to end it, as a traumagenic system, we’ve personally been assaulted, harassed, threatened, told to kill ourself, and had our trauma completely invalidated and discarded by anti-endo traumagenic systems.

Expired Links

Looking for alternatives

Endogenic Research (Text Form) - NightFallSystem

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

Hey everybody.

This is a list of the research and resources we've compiled over the last year or so that refers in some way to plurality, especially in the context of being endogenic and non-traumagenic supportive.

We often argue this subject on Twitter, alongside (hope you don't mind the tags) @cambriancrew and @sophieinwonderland . We've included a few of their posts in this, as they do share some wonderful information. Sophie deals in mainly Tulpamancy, we believe? And Cambrians does a wide range of things. They've both been incredibly helpful, so big credit and massive thank you to those two (and anyone else in this document) :)

Feel free to link this post or the document itself to anyone. Link it everywhere. Feel free to tag us too, as your friendly neighbourhood endo-friendly traumagenic DID system with PTSD and CPTSD. Our collective pronouns are phe/phex/phins, and we're collectively called Guardians or Guardians System.

Hope this helps some folks! If anything's wrong in this post, mention it in the notes (we think that's how Tumblr works?) and we'll adjust it in the Google Document. Alternatively, if you'd prefer to remain anonymous or would like to talk to us directly, you can check our LinkTree at the top of this page. We're always open to feedback and new research! We're especially interested in making our document more reader-friendly, as it can be a bit of an eyesore. but we're not the best at formatting documents.

If we do receive updates to edit some information, we'll be doing so on the document, so always double-check there in case there's been a change. If there are enough updates, we'll redo this post, but hopefully, that won't be necessary for a long time, because formatting all this in Tumblr is more than enough for us.

Thank you for reading!

-Rakan (not Marcus, fuck you Marcus)

[interstellar-cluster]

Almost-friendly sysmed reminder

Firstly, anti-endos be respectful. This post isn’t to bash you or disordered systems. It is meant to educate people on the DID/OSDD criteria and how the DSM-5 and ICD-11 both essentially prove the existence of non-disordered systems.

Please also note that we’re endogenic. We don’t have any diagnoses and we’re taking the information in the DSM-5 and ICD-11 at face-value.

Another note: This post is also not meant to say that people’s experiences are invalid or not true. Once again, we’re taking this information of the diagnostic criteria for DID at face value, and this doesn’t account for personal experiences. This is purely the diagnostic criteria for DID/OSDD. We also don’t have a lot of information on UDD so we won’t be talking about that here.

Every system is valid.

The rest of this will be under the cut because it is LONG and I don’t want to clog up my page.

So we’ll get right to the point. Trauma is not part of the diagnostic criteria for DID/OSDD, nor is the disorder developing in early childhood part of the disorder. Trauma is very commonly associated with trauma in early childhood but this doesn’t mean that the disorder requires trauma to develop.

Regarding the Structural Dissociation Theory, this is only a theory. It might be proved, disproved, changed or they may not fit every experience. Theories aren’t concrete, and the human brain is so incredibly complex that it’s almost impossible at this time and age to prove anything.

Criterion 3 in the DSM-5 and criterion 6 in the ICD-11 state that the plurality or symptoms of such must be distressing for the plural with the disorder. If the plurality is not distressing or, in the ICD-11, causing significant impairment in important areas of functioning (personal, social, educational, etc), then it is not a disorder.

These criteria are explicitly stated to exclude plurals who do NOT find that their plurality causes impairment to their functioning. This inherently means that plurality CAN exist without causing distress or impairment.

Another criterion that explicitly excludes non-traumagenic systems from the DID criteria is that the plurality must not be part of normal cultural or religious practices. This includes tulpamancy and is, once again, stated to exclude these types of plurality from being diagnosed with DID because they are recognised to be non-traumagenic and that they exist.

So, TLDR; trauma isn’t necessary for plurality; you need to be distressed about the symptoms of your plurality to be disordered which, by extension, means that non-disordered plurality exists; and cultural and religious practices are excluded from the criteria of DID which means that doctors acknowledge that plurality can exist without being disordered.

(This entire post also occurs to OSDD because it generally follows the same criteria as DID with either DID criterion A or B or both not occurring in OSDD patients.)

Thanks for coming to our Ted Talk. We’re not looking to discuss this, sysmeds/anti-endos can look but do not interact. We will freely block anyone who reposts this just to argue for the sake of ridiculing endo systems.

- 🕸️🎧

[lastwave]

Harry Du Bois, the skills + DID/OSDD coding

a compilation of most of my thoughts on harry as a system (note: i am system im not just like. pulling stuff out my ass)

1. Structural Dissociation Theory crash course

so for this point i'm going to give you a crash course structural dissociation theory (do not use me as a source for ur knowledge on it this is very like. base level and just to establish context)

structural dissociation states that we all start as multiple different facets, and that as we grow up, these facets all fuse into a cohesive personality. however, in DID/OSDD, ongoing trauma proves it safer to NOT fuse these facets and instead develop dissociative and amnestic barriers between them to varying degrees. these facets cope by developing into individual personalities, and if traumatic events persist, the brain may split more personalities to try and cope with this. this gives us two bits of information that i'm going to use throughout this

1. there is no "original", just alters that host for long periods of time and/or identify with the body the most

2. amnestic & dissociative barriers are fluid. in times of rest, these barriers may start to come down between some alters, but not necessarily all.

**NOTE: these are not hard and fast rules and vary from system to system. it's also vastly different if you have Polyfrag DID or Complex DID. since I don't hc Harry as polyfrag or complex tho, i'm not gonna get into that

2. Harry (the system)

so it's pretty easy to establish that harry has a good handful of childhood trauma. being born in a military hospital + town and growing up there means he probably saw and/or heard a lot of death and sickness. we also know his father left based on the logic passive in the measurehead conversation

we also know from the reaction speed passive when you find out your name that harry was born in a time all these were concerns. most likely, hunger, considering how through the game hunger + eating is an undertone w/ harry

we also have the klaasje half-light passive implying that harry's been raped (might not have occurred during childhood, but still a contributing factor to trauma)

my point being bro has enough childhood trauma and then some to create a system.

we also see a LOT of amnestic barriers between harry and the rest of the skills. besides the obvious not remembering anything, we see the skills remembering things that harry doesn't.

for example, EChem remembers that harry took speed some point recently, while harry himself doesn't

we also see that the skills have distinct personalities and opinions separate from each other. shit we've got a communist (rhetoric) and a fascist (endurance) living in the same fucking body. half light is immediately suspicious of everyone and everything while empathy tries to understand everyone even to their own detriment. and volition and echem need a whole post of their own. thats some pretty strong dissociative barriers

3. Harry (the alter)

to be quite honest with you i think harry as we, the audience, know him is a brand new split, an introject* of an old host that has either fused with another alter or gone dormant. he's trying to fill a different harry du bois's shoes- someone he is fundamentally similar to, but is, at his core, not

*Definition from did-research.org: Introjects are alters that are based off of an outside person or figure. Introjects may or may not see themselves as the individual that they represent.

knowing nothing about yourself, even what you look like, is a common feeling for new splits (in our experience). with the high amnestic barriers separating harry from the rest of the system, it makes sense that the first time he is conscious he is totally lost about his own identity, where he lives, or what his occupation even is.

losing facts about basic reality is probably a dissociative response. things the brain knows (see encyclopedia filling in gaps once given a prompt about something like Fillipe the Conquerer) but doesn't want the new host to know for fear of not being able to function.

4. Certain Alters with Functions

some of the skills fall into alter "archetypes" (not all alters will, even in like. real life systems) and im just gonna list them out here:

ones with subtextual backing:

Volition: Caretaker + Apparent Normal Part

Half-Light: trauma holder

Electro-Chemistry: symptom + trauma holder

Authority: protector

Logic: apparent normal part

ones that are just my headcanons:

Interfacing: little

Endurance: ex-persecutor

Inland Empire: ex-caretaker

here ends my post of articulate thoughts, if u have any like. follow up questions feel free to shoot me an ask. might take me a minute tho

[cybergothvox]

This may not be a new observation for people familiar with hypnosis and trauma, but has anyone noticed how hypnosis seems to work on very similar mechanisms as trauma does?

I was already deeply familiar with trauma academically and personally when I recently started researching hypnosis, and the similarities are making me understand more about how trauma triggers form.

Both hypnosis that induces hypnotic triggers and trauma triggers cause you to associate something with another thing on a deep, subconscious level. Obviously associations can occur in other ways, but only in trauma and hypnosis have I seen such a deep correlation where a single phrase can cause someone to very reflexively perform an action or experience strong emotions.

Additionally, both trauma and hypnosis can induce a dissociative barrier between the trigger and conscious awareness. I read this post on amnesia play for hypnosis kink and I was just struck by like. Holy shit. That is what it feels like when I find an alter with trauma memories I am not supposed to know, and for a second I can remember everything and as I am starting to react emotionally suddenly it all starts to slip away until it feels blank and blurry and I have no idea what it was even though I knew it just a second ago. (Which is why I think to have a full understanding of hypnosis you cannot just look at therapeutic use because I do not think in therapy a memory barrier would be induced like this.)

And it makes sense, right? Like a brain is a brain, its going to have the same structure and mechanisms even in different contexts so it makes sense that it's not that different but I was still quite shocked by it.

And the thing it is making me realize about how trauma forms has to do with what hypnosis is and how it works.

At its core (at least this is what I have read, in several places, though it is a theory and not confirmed, which is fair it is hard to confirm for certain anything about how the mind works due to the nature of it) hypnosis is a heightened state of focus. Generally during hypnosis you are focused and relaxed, and the relaxation is how you can clear your mind enough to focus only on the hypnotists words and the feelings they make you feel.

This made me realize that trauma formation occurs during intense focus as well. The focus is based on fear; one needs to be highly focused on what is going on in a survival situation or a situation where they are being hurt in order to best navigate the situation and get out as quickly as possible, and because that is a High Priority all of the brain is focused on it.

I believe this heightened state of focus in trauma accesses a similar part of the mind that hypnosis does, albeit through violent and unpleasant means, and this is why things that occur during trauma formation can trigger these feelings that were felt during trauma formation to come back.

This is just my personal observations do not take this as academic truth but I am very interested in studying these similarities. If anyone knows any academic papers on this or personal experiences people have written on this topic I would be very interested in reading them.

I will be researching it but of course looking up hypnosis and trauma brings up mainly how hypnosis can be used to treat trauma (which is relevant to the topic still) and it will be hard to find something talking about specifically how hypnosis can sort of mimic trauma on a mechanical level.

(tw: violence)

It's like as if trauma is being attacked and torn open, and hypnosis is surgery. One is violent and damaging, and one is careful and can be healing, but they both reach inside of you to touch the same places.

[blitz0hno]

Times Milgram has implied 3 kayanosys alters sorted by how much of a stretch I think I'm making:

1. His chess piece in Deep Cover

Kotoko is a highly intuitive person - her subconscious has represented Mikoto with three distinct parts on his representative chess piece, and that could mean nothing, sure, but it's a possibility. also worth noting that when this breaks, it shows two prongs broken off, with the third missing. This is shown twice:

The paint splatters for that half are connected, while the other one that broke off was straying away. This is consistent enough for me to consider it a hint at something.

2. Backdraft, in which Mikoto has 3 lines of paint over him. The other guilty prisoners only get one. It looks eerily similar to the chess piece.

3. His birthday flowers. Everyone else got one distinct flower - Mikoto has 3. I don't remember what they all are but in the depths of Tumblr there's an analysis I'm sure I remember existing so shout-out to that mf.

both his prisoner number and birth date are divisible by 3 but that's a bit of a reach lol

4. These flashes in Double

Why 3 silhouettes? Why is one cut off? Could be for aesthetics, could be a clue.

3 eyes = 3 points of view? Mild stretch, but the art of Milgram strikes me as very very intentional. The repeated vertical "stacking" of the lines in Deep Cover, Backdraft, and these eyes remind me of the concept of structural/tertiary dissociation, but again a bit of a reach

4. His uniform

Would almost rank this above Double's visuals. Sure, nearly every prisoner has three vertical straps across the torso, but Mikoto has 3 horizontal straps across his waist and 3 on his wrists (worth noting that the third wrist strap is broken on the Double album cover, which matches the breakage in Deep Cover's MV). 3 stacked lines again. A pattern is a pattern I suppose.

5. A) how the fuck did he know to do this when Mikoto and John had no clue what was happening to them, B) we never see him with his hair like this after MeMe. He disappeared, like Mikoto is implied to be trying to do in Neoplasm. Presumably, he split and/or stopped fronting, resulting in the theoretical "other" two taking over.

6. This frame in Under: MEOWWWWWW BIIIIIG STRETCH!! He's holding up 3 fingers lol (also emphasizing the wrist straps). I'm reaching the way he reaches for his face under stress but it's Something

Some other things that are almost too minor to consider but I thought about them anyway because this project has driven me insane:

-repeated use of red-green-blue-specific coloring in both MeMe and Double

-John is associated with Christ imagery (crown of thorns graphic in Double, "savior" complex etc.), which is closely linked with the "Holy Trinity." The 3 aspects are all considered equally God, and at the same time, equally their own being. Never understood that until I understood plurality, even though we aren't religious anymore.

-3 prevalent major arcana - the Fool, the Hanged Man, and the Devil - in MeMe; followed up by Death at the end (drastic change).

- 9/3 = 3 (could be a coincidence). Also his bangs are divided into three parts (big stretch)

In conclusion either this all means absolutely nothing or I'm about to boost my "theory maker" credibility tenfold in t3 lmao only time will tell

[cripplecharacters]

Complex Dissociative Disorders Terminology: A Basic Primer

[Large text: DID Terminology: A Basic Primer]

Here are some common terms you may see when researching complex dissociative disorders! 

Basic Terms

[Large Text: Basic Terms]

Dissociation - An internal feeling of disconnect between one's body, history, thoughts, emotions, memories, acts, and/or environment. Not everyone who experiences dissociation has a dissociative disorder. Dissociation is a common coping mechanism in times of stress. 

Alter - A dissociated part of a personality that failed to integrate into the self due to trauma. These parts may have their own age, gender, needs, wants, sexuality, species, memories, actions, urges, opinions, skills, abilities, etc. 

Fragment - An alter who is not fully “fleshed out” or differentiated. They may have a single function, emotion, or memory. 

System - The entire collection of alters in one body 

Front - The alter who is “in front” or “fronting” is aware of the outside world, and controlling the body. 

Switch - “to switch” is to change what alter is fronting (controlling the body). This can be slow or fast, planned or unplanned, accidental or intentionality. 

Co-consciousness (co-con) - When two or more alters are aware of the outside world they are co-conscious. 

Passive Influence - When an alter who is not currently fronting affects the fronting alter. This can be in the form of memories, thoughts, emotions, desires, preferences, actions, etc. 

Splitting - To split is to create a new alter 

Amnesia - partial or complete loss of memory (not exclusive to CDD) 

Disorders 

[Large text: Disorders]

Complex Dissociative Disorder (CDD) - An umbrella term for all dissociative disorders that cause systems. This list includes Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID), Other Specified Dissociative Disorder Type 1 (OSDD-1), Unspecified Dissociative Disorder (UDD), and Partial Dissociative Identity Disorder (P-DID).

Dissociative Disorder - To quote https://did-research.org/ “a disorder characterized by a separation of consciousness from emotion, sensation, memory, personal history, sense of self, or sense of reality.”  

Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID) - DID is characterised by two or more dissociative self-states "Alters" that are linked to some degree of amnesia and are capable of assuming executive control. 

Other Specified Dissociative Disorder Type 1 (OSDD-1) - OSDD-1 is a disorder that is very similar to DID but lacks fully differentiated selves (type 1a) or amnesia (type 1b). OSDD in general is a category of dissociative disorders that while not fitting the criteria for any other dissociative disorder, can still be specified. 

Unspecified Dissociative Disorder (UDD) - A category of disorders that can not be labeled, or are unable to be fully understood. This diagnosis is most often applied in crises or emergencies.

Partial Dissociative Identity Disorder (P-DID) - As outlined by the International Classification of Diseases is a condition similar to DID where “One personality state is dominant and normally functions in daily life, but is intruded upon by one or more non-dominant personality states (dissociative intrusions).” Essentially one alter is always in front, but they regularly experience passive influence or co-consciousness. 

Multiple Personality Disorder (MPD) - This is a former term for DID. The name was changed because DID is not a personality disorder, it’s a dissociative disorder. Many people today find this term insensitive, outdated, and offensive, although some systems may choose to self-identify with the term. 

The Theory of Structural Dissociation (TOSD)

[Large Text: The Theory of Structural Dissociation (TOSD)] 

This is the current understanding of how dissociative disorders as well as other disorders caused by trauma are formed and function. To quote https://did-research.org/ “this theory centers around an inability to integrate traumatic memories and materials into one’s primary personality, sense of self, and self history that results in an overall inability to integrate parts.” 

To learn more about anything referenced above I would recommend checking out https://did-research.org/

Thanks, Mod Patch

[anti-lies]

Real Fact: The only way to be plural is by suffering severe childhood trauma according to the theory of structural dissociation

The theory of structural dissociation is currently the most accepted theory for how DID forms. Children naturally have less integrated personalities, and when someone undergoes severe trauma during childhood, it prevents their personality from fully integrating.

This theory is clearly explained in this Carrd.

As this Carrd says, there is no other way one could possibly be a system according to science.

This theory was created in 2006 by Onno van der Hart, Ellert R. S. Nijenhuis and Kathy Steele in the book The Haunted Self, and has remained the main theory for how traumatic dissociation forms for close to 20 years.

These authors are top experts in their field, and this theory clearly proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the only possible way to form dissociative parts of the personality is through trauma.

Any endos who say otherwise are faking and lying. All their so-called sources are outdated or written by themselves or are ableist.

Please, trust the science. Trust the doctors. And trust the Carrd about what those scientists and doctors say.

Anyone who would argue with the doctors who wrote made the Theory of Structural Dissociation are science deniers, no better than flat-earthers or anti-vaxxers.

Now that you've been properly informed, please reblog and share this accurate and true information so you can inform others.

And don't bother clicking underneath the cut. There's nothing important there.

Oh, you're still here?

I thought I told you to leave?

Go on. Get.

There's nothing to see here!

Oh... That.

What's that doing here?

Yeah, don't worry about that. That's just some article written by pro-endos to make it look like you can form dissociative parts of the personality without trauma.

Don't trust the pro-endos and their sources!

Oh... You saw that too, didn't you?

That the source for that happens to be the same exact people I told you to trust earlier.

Fine. Let's deal with that.

First, this says "may." That means that it isn't definitely true. And by rearranging those words, you'll realize that means it definitely isn't true according to the theory of structural dissociation.

Trust me when I say that this still supports us and that these doctors are on our side.

Second...

Endos are stupid

There. I said it.

Endos are what I call half-thinkers.

Endos will try to tell you that if someone is a valid source in one context then they need to be a valid source in all contexts to be consistent. That if you're using the theory of structural dissociation as evidence that the only way to have multiple dissociative parts with their own consciousness is through trauma or a disorder, you should acknowledge that the creators of that theory have entertained other possibilities.

But you who are reading this are smarter than any of those half-thinking endos. You're 4 times as smart as these half-thinkers. You can think double what any endo can at least. That makes you, at minimum, a double-thinker.

And as intelligent and critical double thinkers, you can understand how important context is.

In the first context, the Carrd that referenced the theory by Onno van der Hart and Ellert R. S. Nijenhuis is supporting True Science.

In the second, their actual words from their paper are going against True Science. They're stating something may exist that we know is scientifically impossible. Something we know is scientifically impossible because of what we've heard other people say about the Theory of Structural Dissociation. And that proves the creators of the theory of structural dissociation wrong!

So don't let endos use quotes like this to brainwash you. Remember that you are an intelligent and critical double thinker.

Stay smart and hold firm in your beliefs and values, and never stop double thinking!

<3