Headmates?

[Swordsman18]

Hey guys,

I recently came across a phenomenon on tumblr called headmates. It seems to be some sort of concept where people share their headspace with others. These others can be radically different people of differing gender, species, age, sexuality and so forth. In fact they do not even need to be human such as being otherkin like dragons, lizards, ponies, fairies, clouds, plants or even stars. So I am just curious what exactly this is and what people on elliquiy think about it?

Here's somewhere to start I guess:
multiplicity101.tumblr.com/glossary

[Oniya]

I have a couple of friends who have headmates.  In a way, it's like DID, only without the 'disorder' aspect.  These people are fully functioning members of society, they just sort of run 'by committee'.  All of the headmates work to take care of the physical aspect of things, and are mindful of each other's 'front time' (i.e., time in control of the physical aspect).  Like any good relationship, it all comes down to communication and compromise.

[Swordsman18]

I am not sure what that exactly means? These people have actually fractured their psyches and thus done irreparable damage to their mental well being? I mean you said they are high functioning, but what I am not getting is the DID without it being a disorder. A fractured psyche without a dominant singular personality is a disorder is it not? And if we are not saying that this is not a disorder, are we de-legitimizing those with DID?

[Oniya]

Um - noooo, that's not what I said.  I said that they are functioning members of society.  'They have fractured' implies that they caused this to happen to themselves.  A disorder is something that causes problems.  And no, it does not de-legitimize those who do have problems, any more than polyamory de-legitimizes monogamy.

I'm sorry, I thought that you were asking because you wanted to know about it, not because you wanted to pass judgement.  I'll bow out now.

[Swordsman18]

I apologize for I did not mean to seem as though I was passing judgement, I was merely asking questions. I personally have a BA in Psychology with the intent to go after my Masters degree here in the next year. So when you mention DID, it is a subject that I have studied extensively. So I put it under those terms because that is where my personal understanding of something similar lies.

So if you mind, could you explain to me the process by which a multiple system comes into existence and maintains itself over time? This way I could understand it in its terms rather than under the processes that I understand to be related to DID.

[Pumpkin Seeds]

I think what is being said is that these particular people do not consider it a disorder.  As my friend says, it's only a problem or I guess in this case a disorder if it interferes with your life in a negative fashion.

[kylie]

...
So if you mind, could you explain to me the process by which a multiple system comes into existence and maintains itself over time?

      Aside from it's probably missing a "don't"...  I think it's a fair enough question.  I could say something about how trans/queer feels and seems at least to maintain (or maybe simply, manifest) itself, as I suspect there are certain parallels.  But I don't know enough about what people would say if they believe there are actually wholly separate, sentient entities inside their head.

      Sure I talk to myself, engage in roleplay sometimes (nudge, wink!  ), and feel like various gendered "sides" of my personality are stronger or weaker in various situations...  And I really don't think it's a particularly untenable, nor necessarily detrimental, thing for the brain to contain or generate multiple personae.  I can imagine some persona(e) [keep forgetting that e, just spelling!] being more dominant than others at different times or in different contexts.  I could even imagine changing my name, perhaps repeatedly -- Oh wait, I have a few times when living in foreign countries and being demanded to assume new ones, or when people just couldn't pronounce mine...  So far, so what. 

       I also don't see how it's particularly problematic for people to act through (and thereby, adopt, adapt to, assume to the point of blurring...) various personae at various times, except that the society at large demands a presentation of a constant unity and "best" (according to that society's going norms) is generally if one's presentation fits most of the social categories present company demands that bodies and social members "like you/ yours" act according to widely enforced prescriptions.  (See also general weakness/vagueness of "DID" as a basis for any precision measurements here, at least from some quick Wiki writer's point of view.  But I'm suspicious, too.  The history of Trans in the DSM has hardly been glorious or grounded in thorough social and comparative analysis, either.)

      All that being said, despite having foraged through a few (very busy!) links from this rather intriguing slice of Tumblr by Meeresbande (who seems, I think to believe that they exemplify both multiple system, and a more or less healthy form of DID!) ...  I haven't found what I'd call a great deal just yet about how or when this experience of "multiple system" etc. often starts for people who claim it as such.  (If indeed there is much agreement about it?  With trans I would say there is some range, although it often manifests fairly young in some ways.) 

Meeresbande refers briefly to their own received childhood trauma as a possible source. 

Miaren (see "What do you mean, 'Awakening'?") seems to identify as/include (?) fae among her kin (and thus phrases things much in terms of relationships to fae or lack thereof), writes that some 'discover' selves more by study and others are more shook into recognizing them, while still others appear to suppress or resist members' appearing. 

This community faq from 2001 (see 2.1) also describes it as a "spiritual practice," but agrees that it may be "overnight" or a much more extended matter.  However, a rare few (2.4) are apparently "born and raised" with acceptance or perhaps self-awareness of this situation...

      And here's at least one description of how the system could feel in its working...  The metaphor of a house (see Intermediate section - "Headspace") with limited "window" space on the world for one or a few "front" people to handle observation/exterior social life, and some more isolated "back rooms" where more indisposed personae/inhabitants might be retiring, possibly coalescing, or in some cases fomenting mischief or various forms of self/community sabotage. 

Of course, that is an experiential narrative, and not any neurological analysis of what some electricity in the brain might be doing to put the whole movie on screen.  I'm not sure any wiring is necessarily more or less "normal," never mind useful, when it comes to that so long as the world isn't being blown up and millions more aren't being bombed or cornered into structural servitude or poverty.  Who knows, maybe some even have better wiring but they seem to be tragically few or somehow regularly marginalized, if so! 

       There are quite a few more links from that FAQ page...  Not sure, but some might just help with the question about "How?" Though with the sort of thing that conventional society rejects out of hand, some may still be useful for immediate, more materially constructive thought... 

       And then there's also some (I'd guess quite off the cuff) "worse," those corners where it starts toying with past lives and aliens?  When it comes to those, I rather suspect you'll probably find more interesting/useful/ at least inspiring (if not always convincing??) stuff in the way of "Well, why the heck not exactly" and a bit of "Who really knows."

[Aethereal]

        It would be very interesting to run some of the self-proclaimed headmate people through some brain tests and see what parts of their brains do they use when "switching control," et cetera - are there actually multiple I-s or is the part generally used for judging others used. Figure out what is going on in there compared to a DID person and your typical single-identity person.
       (Brains, minds, computers and AI alike are quite fascinating to me, and I favor the scientific approach. I like figuring out how things work.)

[kylie]

     I dunno...  I suppose you could, but I'm a little dubious about how "useful" such information would be.  What people experience and what it means for society are often on a somehow different plane, or at least partly so I'd say, from whatever part of the brain is doing what.  Granted there are certain possibly progressive comparative uses -- like if gay and trans-identifying people somewhat often show brain activity different from people with other identifications.  But I'm also feeling a little anxious myself about what you'd expect to find exactly, and what various people would be likely to argue it "leads to" in social and prescriptive potential.

      Perhaps it's just incidental, but... If you were to call trans or queer or gay "self-proclaimed," I think we would have a small firestorm around here.  So why is it okay to use that term for this crowd?  Okay that sounds a bit loaded...  But could you simply mean self-identifying?  To me, self-proclaimed often carries a pejorative nuance along the lines of, 'They couldn't possibly have any legitimate reason to describe themselves that way.'  And if their definitions at least sometimes allow that it might be just their own experience they're describing, then well who are we to "proclaim" that something else must be more true?  Usually when I hear "proclaim" I feel it has a religious ring to it, like this is what one must believe, but I don't see that such is all so necessary (let alone so simple) here.

      I'm still not entirely clear how many "multiple" people also (simultaneously) consider themselves potentially or actually DID, either.  (And whatever are you going to do when some say, "some of us in my system are DID, and some aren't" ?) But off the cuff, and it's really just a hunch from a couple hours' reading, I suppose there might be enough who identify as multiple and non-DID to do some small-scale study...  No idea whether this sort of community has the numbers to do much of a statistically significant study, though (or whether so many would really care to participate in it).

[Mikem]

I'm sorry, I thought that you were asking because you wanted to know about it, not because you wanted to pass judgement.  I'll bow out now.

Judgement is just another natural instinctive action. It's pretty difficult to not do it in some form, but I'm sure he didn't mean it that way.

I have a feeling that, if I share my two cents about this subject, I'm probably going to be castrated somehow, even if my intentions aren't hostile. But I did a quick lookup of DID, cause I didn't recognize the acronym but I did recognize the Disorder, and doesn't this subject get covered under that? "A disorder characterized by the presence of two or more distinct personality states." I know people say, if it isn't harmful to your wellbeing, then how is it a disorder? But not all medical conditions are necessarily harmful to you. I think I've read about a few that people live with their whole lives without adverse affects, but they're still considered disorders. And that word doesn't really need to carry all that much stigma. Disorder just means the opposite of order, of what is generally "normal" for the species. That doesn't make suddenly make them outcasts or undesirable members of Humanity. And honestly, having more than one personality in a single mind is a bit "disorderly".

Which one is the true one? Wouldn't they be fighting over dominant control of the mind? I feel like the phrase, "There can be only one." comes to mind. Then again, the idea of people having these multiple personalities in their mind while living a relatively normal life, makes me think there still is some reason behind it. Like what another person said, a traumatic event, or maybe growing up incredibly lonely.

I'll admit, I talk to myself. Alot. To the point where it worries my mother a little.

[Aethereal]

      People use words a bit differently. Self-proclaimed is both neutral to me and feels more accurate than self-identifying? Ehh...
      Why should any research immediately result in shift in societal norms? As long as they're not threat to themselves or others, people are people are people, and can believe whatever they wish. For me, disassembling and putting things back together is a big part of how I come to understand the world. I reverse-engineer. Make connections between cause and result. The more we learn about *why* we think or feel or perceive things in a certain manner, the better. 
      I also will readily admit that in some parts, I'm an anomaly myself. Is it bad? No.

      (But perhaps I'll pick this topic up later, when I'm actually awake.)

[Blythe]

"A disorder characterized by the presence of two or more distinct personality states." I know people say, if it isn't harmful to your wellbeing, then how is it a disorder? But not all medical conditions are necessarily harmful to you. I think I've read about a few that people live with their whole lives without adverse affects, but they're still considered disorders. And that word doesn't really need to carry all that much stigma. Disorder just means the opposite of order, of what is generally "normal" for the species. That doesn't make suddenly make them outcasts or undesirable members of Humanity. And honestly, having more than one personality in a single mind is a bit "disorderly".

Actually, for a diagnosis of DID, you do have to meet this particular criteria:

C - An individual must be distressed by the disorder or have an impaired ability to function in a major area of life as a result. This is described as follows:
"The symptoms cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning." [2]:155

So if it's not causing impairment in function, then no, a person with headmates would not technically be classed as having DID or similar to my understanding. Headmates function fine with no impairment from that state, from what I've read about it. It takes more than simply differing from cultural or societal norms/expectations to be construed as having a disorder.

I'm not so sure having more than one personality is even necessarily 'disorderly' (as in 'chaotic'). Oniya said above that:

All of the headmates work to take care of the physical aspect of things, and are mindful of each other's 'front time' (i.e., time in control of the physical aspect).  Like any good relationship, it all comes down to communication and compromise.

This doesn't sound disorganized or disorderly to me. Sort of makes me think of a gathering of friends scheduling group activities, in a way (I know it's not an accurate comparison, just what it puts me in mind of).

Certainly 'headmates' are very different from how I understand identity, sure, but this sounds very organized and very in control.
__

Anyways, on topic as to what I personally think of headmates from the little I have read (and I'm going to admit I understand very little of this): If they function just fine and are happy, more power to them. 

I'll step out from the thread now, as I don't have enough knowledge to really much discuss the topic effectively. 

[kylie]

      People use words a bit differently. Self-proclaimed is both neutral to me and feels more accurate than self-identifying? Ehh...

      I dunno.  But mostly in social science and in sexual communities, I've been in groups where self-identifying was seen a lot more positively.  Maybe you're thinking you can only "identify" something if it has some particular scientific proof??  But the actual usage of self-identify is more "identify as" and the concern is more with what it means or does in emotional and social worlds.  I don't know what sort of proof would be "enough" when it comes to other groups like gay and trans, either though.  In short, I'm not really sure how "proclaim" would be more accurate.  "Proclamations"are generally are more political or religious documents aimed at other people with a broader social program/agenda of sorts at least implied...  But here, I don't see that they're doing more (or should I emphasize "more"? because I could imagine something "bigger" myself) than ask for social recognition of a certain perception.  Or if some are asking for more, then at least not all of them are. 

      I guess there's a certain "revelatory" sense here which people also tend to associate with the word "proclaim," as in Gee, you really need to know this about my world...  But I've pretty much been led to believe that calling that self-identification or just 'identifying as' gets the job done, without confusing things.

      Why should any research immediately result in shift in societal norms? As long as they're not threat to themselves or others, people are people are people, and can believe whatever they wish.

Objectively, I don't think it should as a matter of course.  It's more that we often find people are uncovering the sort of things that back up their social assumptions to begin with. 

      To put it another way, I often feel a little critical of the gay rights movement for hoping for some underlying biological/chemical system in the brain that would necessitate differences of orientation and make such differences somehow (some might say) fundamentally unavoidable or unchangeable.  It's not that I think people aren't what they say they are -- it's that I'm uncomfortable with rendering a complex social question about identity and self-growth, self-discovery, the whole "How did this experience develop?" into basically a question of "Is there something in your brain that makes you basically always this way, and everything else is just a question of whether you've accepted or discovered it, and once you do, nothing in your social environment could really matter to how you embody things or what particular people you end up associating with, or how this all plays out in any particular place..."  On and on and on. 

      Both sides of the issue end up looking for biological excuses for things that are mostly experienced as sets of social interactions and external stimuli in the process of actually recognizing and fine tuning them.  But then people turn around and are so eager to have that "Our brains are different" as a defense for keeping people in identity/disorder/orientation boxes that would just minimize similarities and very nagging social issues many people have.  I'm not sure saying one's brain has a certain wiring really explains quite that much to me about how the world works.  It becomes more an excuse to fence off the communities than to understand life as a spectrum and a set of interlocking social dimensions.  That's what such research is often getting adopted for politically once it's done, if it does find enough difference.  And I think social life is probably actually plenty of the latter -- we're not all such different animals here -- even if people don't always agree or get along.  So personally I'd rather hear more about how society organized stuff and played out in ways that led to different people, expressing or realizing things at different times and in different ways (even if we say they're quite different things to go through).

     But yes, I might be picking over "proclaim" a bit much because I'm pretty sure many others would say oh yes, "self-proclaimed" surely because there can't possibly be any empirical reality there.  It's often deployed as a pretty mocking term, if you look around.  It's a lot more touchy what questions will be asked exactly if the study is loaded at the beginning with words that might seem to suggest, oh they're obviously just delusional.  Will you also then go around saying most  people are "self-proclaimed singlets", might be the test?  Would you be equally comfortable having the same terms applied to say, yourself?

[Aethereal]

      You can reliably identify trans- and homosexual people just by reading their brains, yes. And whether we want it or not - yes, we are "simply" our brains. I am putting "simply" in quotation marks because brains are by no means simple things.  (And no, brains can't be divided into clear types any more than we only have 1.5 and 2 meter tall people with no one in between or above or below, and lack any kind of other appearance besides height.)
      How you sense words has a lot to do with what communities you frequent. I have no issues saying I am self-proclaimed something or other. Similarly, self-identified is a word I've often seen in context where it has little to absolutely nothing to do with *identity* and much more with very questionable self-diagnosis.

[HannibalBarca]

I had to stop and wonder about the amazing reality of headmates.  The human brain is capable of so very much.  Having cooperative identities makes sense for an organ that can multitask so well, isn't it?  Couldn't this condition simply be considered a higher order of multitasking?  Sort of like a quad-core CPU instead of a single-core.

As far as whether it is a disorder or not...if there is no pathology to it, then it is benign.  My own daughter has synesthesia, in two ways: she can smell colors (where her olfactory bulb registers also when her vision detects colors), and she constantly sees pastel blobs of color on objects that only register in her own mind.  We have had a lot of enjoyable conversations, where she describes to me the difference in scents between, say, mauve and lavender, or violet.

With the complexity of the brain, and the fact that we cannot, at present, literally live from within another person's mind, there could be a limitless amount of curious and fascinating qualities of the mind that only we ourselves can experience.  Considering the creativity displayed here at E, I am sure many more of us than we know have some of those very unique qualities, and, for the most part, I believe they are benign and beneficial.

[Ephiral]

      You can reliably identify trans- and homosexual people just by reading their brains, yes.

Citation needed on trans* people; as far as I'm aware, there haven't been enough studies (and certainly not at large enough scale) to confirm anything like this.

[Aethereal]

Citation needed on trans* people; as far as I'm aware, there haven't been enough studies (and certainly not at large enough scale) to confirm anything like this.

A trans person I know over the net had a few somewhat reliable-looking articles and research papers on it. If I recall later, I can see whether he's still around on the other site (he pretty much left the site I originally encountered him because of drama) he moved to alongside me. Perhaps he still has the links stashed away somewhere.
       - Right now I'm just taking brief breaks from working in order to not end up even more deranged than I already am (I work from home, but the deadlines are fairly strict this time around), so not much researching or hunting people for me at the moment.

[Kythia]

Googling "brain difference transexuals" pulls up an awful lot.  From a brief scan of some of it, that does appear to be the consensus but I am so far out of my depth it's untrue so take that with vast vast quantities of salt.

[kylie]

       I'm not saying people simply shouldn't know how the brain works; I'm saying socially I'm not sure that what scientists can piece together there tells us all that much about the lived experiences of all the millions of people who could be in/are in (I dunno that much about "multi") these groups.  So I don't see how taking apart or mapping neuron pathways or whatever is in there, really answers questions like "How does such a system sustain itself" in a social sense.  Maybe that wasn't how the question was intended at all, but hey I've been busy on the more ethnographic and occasionally, media/political analysis ends. 

       Perhaps if there are consistent enough differences to satisfy whatever statistical criteria, then that answers what is the brain doing in a very general sense such that people can stand up and say, "Hey we really are physically different."  Although it doesn't make me all that happy necessarily, because socially that also often gets translated into demands within groups that "model" people among the minority should have lots of other physical evidence of living differently to show from much of their lifetime...  And if you know much about the social world, well some people can do that and some can't.  It's a problem of external conditions, nurture as well as nature at some level.  So I worry there could be some dangerous bleeding and blurring between neurological and behavioral worlds that goes on when it's a busy rights campaign going on and looking for any sort of "fundamental" biological proof.

        Perhaps "multi-system" etc. identifying people are a smaller population than same-sex orientations, or even trans?  I don't really know.  I wonder.  But unless most of them come from a certain narrow demographic in many other respects, I have to wonder what's really being explained.  If you just want to know, does sector#X look different sure...  But that's not all I want, when I ask how do people experience things or describe themselves. 

         Another example: Though I might be tempted to ask where you'd find physical evidence that more conservative Republicans are often hyper averse to critical sarcasm in most of their brains, too...  How much more would I really know from studying neuron paths or whatever they look at in the physical brain tissue...  As opposed to what is typically observed in interacting with them or giving them surveys to at least supply the responses themselves?  And if you found some differences in the brain, what would you expect people to say then?  It's a self-supporting system?  Or could it also be partly socialized and learned, or inhibited by all sorts of social factors?  Would it be biological destiny for all of them?  At some point, I like to hear more what people (at least the people themselves or people with some positive intent) say things are for, and not just what they "look like" or "are" in a mass of tissue.  Not saying I'm not at all curious though, if it's really all that simple to see the physical differences (which I'm kinda skeptical but I dunno).

[Aethereal]

And if you found some differences in the brain, what would you expect people to say then?  It's a self-supporting system?  Or could it also be partly socialized and learned, or inhibited by all sorts of social factors?  Would it be biological destiny for all of them?

The brain isn't an entirely immutable system. It is constantly developing and can even completely rewire itself (especially in people who have lost a part of their brain), all the while other parts of said brain will remain unchanged from childhood to death. Hence the most logical step would be to find out whether it is due to preprogramming or influences during life...

[Ephiral]

Huh. All right, pleased to stand corrected on the literature.

      The brain isn't an entirely immutable system. It is constantly developing and can even completely rewire itself (especially in people who have lost a part of their brain), all the while other parts of said brain will remain unchanged from childhood to death. Hence the most logical step would be to find out whether it is due to preprogramming or influences during life...

What I think kylie's getting at is that this is an extremely difficult problem. The question of nature vs nurture is nowhere near as easy to resolve as you seem to think, particularly not while staying within the bounds of scientific ethics re: human experimentation.

[SweetSerenade]

Alright, I'm probably cracking open an entire can of worms with this. Hello, I'm Sweet, and I'm someone with 'headmates'. So many different varieties of races, genders, sexualities (though most are pretty linear in sexuality), and varied personalities/looks. Why do I do this? Because I think you deserve a chance to interact with someone that happens to have a working legitimate 'Headmate' situation. Over the course of my life I originally thought it started as a manifestation of stress and a need to have someone to talk to, a need to have a 'friend' at all times. Later I realized that these beings, entities if you will - are their own creations and own aspects. It delves a lot into my beliefs on Multi-Dimensional facets and how the human realm perceives them.

I don't use a 'window' or a 'front' time analogy for when a personality is in control, I call it 'the Control panel' as I literally perceive it as a series of computational boards with several screens that perceive many aspects around me. We don't really argue about time, when someone wants to come out - we generally talk about it, imagine a little conference table if you will, and they generally get their turn. I generally have a 'Headmate' for every version of every character I have ever roleplayed. Some more Dominant than others, in the aspect that some continuities of character are more 'prominent' than others.

This also includes any character of any book I have been working on, for however long I have been working on them. You might think that would get crowed, but I literally perceive my own mind as a limitless space of capability. Plus there are what I call 'portals', gateways if you will, in my mind that can transport these people back and forth to their 'homeworlds'.

I know everything they do, they know everything I do. Because that's how we work. We make decisions together, come to conferences, and sometimes even fight with each other. Like normal roomies would. But the difference is some of the 'headmates' have special powers and it can get a little mess in here sometimes.

So when I say that my 'muse' for a particular story isn't working... I literally mean the chances are they are sitting on my  brain couch with a glare on their face and a middle finger in the air. They can be utter and complete brats. They can also be scared away by things that happen around me, or 'to them' through roleplays.

If you want some more insight from someone like me, ask away. But I should make it known now that I don't like being accused of mental disorders, so let's leave those off the table please?

[TaintedAndDelish]

Thank you for giving some clarity on this, SweetSerenade.

If I may ask, this sounds similiar to the experience of talking to yourself. I don't mean that in a derogatory way, but I was talking with Mrs. Taint a few years ago, and we got into a conversation about how her head (aka her roomate ) was nagging her about something again. We had never discussed this before, but she laughed when she realized that I knew exactly what she meant and that I do the same exact thing. We have conversations, debates and even full blown disagreements with ourselves all the time.

Personally, I just refer to these as my voices or personas for a lack of better terminology. Some personas I converse with directly, while at other times, I feel as if I AM that persona. Or in other words, my set of thoughts, desires, values and so on will shift to another set. ( yes, almost like how a cpu will push its registers onto the stack and pop them off )  I am still me, I don't lose consciousness or suffer amnesia or anything, and I know that these voices in my head are my own - and not demons or aliens that are out to spy on and persecute me. ( Sometimes I think there is a very thin line between sanity and madness )


Is this what you mean by headmates?

[PennySludt]

I had always assumed in my discussions with my friends that they mean alters when talking about 'headmates' and use that term regularly to refer to everyone. We've never used that term, simply because for a long time I didn't consider them 'mates'. They were just sharing space with me. I mean, we were friends most of the time, but....I don't know....headmate was never a term I thought applied to us. It also seems to have quite a British sound to it, since mate isn't exactly an American words typically used. It may be that it's simply a linguistic difference in perspective? Alters, headmates, others, friends....they're all in there together, so does it really matter what they're specifically called?

I haven't addressed anything like this on my thread, but perhaps it would be helpful? I could ask a few of my friends their thoughts on the topic and get a better idea of everyone's definition of the term?

[Renegade Vile]

I recently came across a phenomenon on tumblr called headmates.

The mere mention of Tumblr, and afterwards Otherkin, immediately makes me assume that, for many of these headmate cases, this is yet another "Special Snowflake" case. Granted, this is yet another thing spawned on that website that I've yet to read up on, but for once, I honestly feel like my curiosity is dead.
All I can say is to not take this too seriously, at least not when presented on that website.