(no subject)
May. 28th, 2021 04:15 pmStill armpits-deep in work heck, but surfacing momentarily to share an interesting article we came across:
https://aeon.co/ideas/what-we-can-learn-about-respect-and-identity-from-plurals
We have a big bone to pick with their statement that most DID systems wouldn't be considered multiple because "Plurals don’t just feel as though they are psychologically multiple – they believe that they are." (Under this definition, any plural pre-discovery or in denial is not plural. And how do you even account for situations where given members are deep in denial while others aren't? Also, there's the whole history of pushing integration on DID and ableism within the community and splitting hairs about who belongs where and ARGH.)
Also, their notation for individual system members. Not really a fan of the "part of one human being" definition, would much rather define it as "part of the collective within one physical body" or something similar. Would also much rather they used headmate or systemmate or something like that instead of the weird person with a little p that's hard to relay elsewhere.
Still, it's always pretty surprising to come across an article in a Publication(tm) that's not outright hostile and makes an attempt to understand. Kudos to them!
https://aeon.co/ideas/what-we-can-learn-about-respect-and-identity-from-plurals
We have a big bone to pick with their statement that most DID systems wouldn't be considered multiple because "Plurals don’t just feel as though they are psychologically multiple – they believe that they are." (Under this definition, any plural pre-discovery or in denial is not plural. And how do you even account for situations where given members are deep in denial while others aren't? Also, there's the whole history of pushing integration on DID and ableism within the community and splitting hairs about who belongs where and ARGH.)
Also, their notation for individual system members. Not really a fan of the "part of one human being" definition, would much rather define it as "part of the collective within one physical body" or something similar. Would also much rather they used headmate or systemmate or something like that instead of the weird person with a little p that's hard to relay elsewhere.
Still, it's always pretty surprising to come across an article in a Publication(tm) that's not outright hostile and makes an attempt to understand. Kudos to them!