I am traumogenic (trauma created/clinical DID) plural system. It is highly likely that I never had a "core personality" that I was born as and instead have always had either an infant mental state or multiple personalities. (During the time most babies begin to form a coherent personality, I formed several. It is possible that not every system forms like this but highly like I did)
Every time I've felt I was singular, I've experienced mental walls, amnesia and other DID symptoms. If someone could do a "I'm singular ama" that'd be cool because I have questions too. :)
The many faces of Jane I'll check it one day. I had some examples in mind that I wanted to ask about but didn't know if it would be uncouth to start asking about my favorite shows or not. I don't know if singular writers, I think that's the term right, managed to portray it correctly. Like I'm willing to discard anything preconceived notions I have. You mentioned a book earlier that I wanna check out now.
Go for it. It's an Ask Me Anything
There is an example I wanna ask about. One is about Jojo part 5 specifically the main antagonist so spoilers. I heard a cool theory before that I'll link now. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-zyphBKETI
spoiler
The gist of it is that trauma caused a split, Doppio seems to be younger than Diavolo as represented with how Doppio looks much younger. Diavolo seems like a bastard but is protective of Doppio. Doppio does not seem aware of Diavolo and talks to him via phone or any object that can act as a phone.
I don't know if you got any weeb in ya and was reluctant to ask. I also realize that portraying this in this context might be problematic.
Also, DID isn't caused by one time severe trauma. It is caused by repeated trauma that cannot be escaped by very young children and if slavery, cult abuse, child soliders or other extremes of the extreme are involved then you get a poly fragmented system. The situation mentioned in that video would not cause DID.
Thanks for clearing this up. I'm starting to see why you had a blank earlier since this be complex. I have two other example in mind but I think you answered a lot with this response. Been reading and rereading what you wrote slowly wrapping my head around it.
Ah, so this character doesn't seem to be inherently offensive because what seems to be depicted is a fantasy type of possession as opposed to DID/OSDD. Now the video is done by a person who really does not know what they they are talking about, like at all. This person used Erikson's work as a frame of reference as opposed to anything from the ISSTD. The age range of the trauma origin seems to be starting at 12 which is another "hell no" for DID/OSDD. (Things like possession narratives and "tulpas" may vary. I don't want to get into those here because one topic at a time and also this is a fantasy work) The cut off age for forming DID may actually be 6-8. 12 is way out of the question unless there is another major neurological thing going on that would make the 12 year old cognitively in a much lower range.
The theory most references for DID is actually the theory of structural disassociation and that theory has come under increased scrutiny because one of the founders of it just lost his license to practice forever because he was found guilty of using this to severely torture a patient with DID. So um...people are kinda doing a double take on this guy's work. (He wasn't the sole founder of the theory) There is a video from Power to The Plurals talking about how this theory is ableist in the eyes of the Stronghold System. I'm not sure what I think of that claim tbh. I need to do more research but given the severe abuse that occurred, I needed to mention this.
In DID there is no "original vs split" all members of a DID system are alters, equally so with the possible exception of fragments in poly fragmented DID systems but only because they integrate so easily and only contain small pieces of cognition. They aren't not people, they just merge successfully easily. (Alters merging, fusing and blending is a thing)
Typically a clinical would frame things as Apparently Normal Parts vs Emotional Parts. This is a binary I actually can't relate to. Allison Miller, who worked with extreme abuse survivors (...Think cultic abuse) wrote in her book "Becoming Yourself" how this binary didn't make sense for her clients.
"Parts" language also wasn't originally invented for DID and people with BPD and CPTSD can explain experience fragments and parts. Some alters will FIGHT that terminology. There is also "family systems therapy" where every human is thought to have parts... But family system's therapists have been known to "nope" out of treating poly fragmented DID systems. I have a book on "easy ego state interventions" that uses parts language and also the popularity of pop Jungian writings and "neo shamanism" also shows that sometimes "parts" as a concept can help people
I appreciate all these posts a ton. they helped me learn something about myself.
this part is especially interesting for me. my traumatic experiences began around age 9 or 10 but your descriptions of alters and fronting actually resonate with me as, while I definitely don't have anything near the same severity category as DID, I did have at least one... something... separate from the... something else... that dealt with reality, for a time, and there are perhaps more pieces I'm less aware of. my transition has helped me mostly reintegrate but reading this thread made me realize that there's more complexity still here than I'd realized. I don't know, I've never really thought about this in these terms before and I'll have to reprocess some experiences to be sure.
I'll check out the podcast you recommended, for sure.
Easy Ego State Interventions might be a helpful text as well. One of the good things about the Plural Association and the Hearing Voices movement is that they are open to people without a diagnosis and have a broader inclusion of experiences beyond DID/OSDD.
Hope that helps. Also the cut off age is debated.