• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Ember.Vesper

  • Rank
    And Iris


  • Sex

Recent Profile Visitors

221 profile views
  1. Added quote to include context. If you would like to see the original thread, please go here. -Ranger No, traumatic switching and tulpamantic switching are really different. I don't want to go into detail here because it would derail the thread. Derailing or not, if you make an allegation, it is subject to challenge. Triggered switching in multiple systems is different from intentional switching in tulpamantic systems, yes, and I assume that is what you are talking about. However, this is primarily a difference between triggered switching and intentional switching, rather than a difference between multiple switching and tulpamantic switching. The default condition of traumagenic multiple systems is to switch as a coping mechanism for stressful situations. The system unconsciously puts the alter in charge that it deems most appropriate to the situation. From a rational perspective, this often a poor choice based on situations that no longer exist and considerations that are no longer relevant. However, once alters become aware of one another and learn to communicate, they can learn to take control over most of their own switching and to prevent all but the most intensely provoked triggered switching. All the multiple systems of my personal acquaintance eventually learned this. The techniques they use are very similar to those of tulpamancers. I attribute a portion of my own system's trivial ease at mastering switching to years of familiarity with watching my ex-wives switch and talking to them about what they did. Meanwhile, tulpamantic systems can use intention and habit to intentionally create triggers that bring a useful headmate forward in a situation. The Bears' Forcing Filter experiment evolved into this after only a few days: https://community.tulpa.info/topic/14585-forcing-filter-experiment Mild triggers can happen unintentionally even in nontraumatic systems. For example, if I'm switched in and one of Vesper's friends spots me and calls out to her, she may be triggered in without either of us thinking about it or consenting to it, only realizing what happened later, when given a chance to reflect. -Ember
  2. Vesper: Remember all the times I've said that I experience all bodily sensations just as vividly and intently while switched out as while switched in? The body has a cold and there is no escape. Mortal bodies are awful. If you don't hear from us for a while, we've gone back to bed. (Twenty percent of cases of the common cold are caused by coronaviruses. But don't confuse ordinary coronaviruses with COVID-19.) Iris: Oddly enough, we feel much better when I switch in. This may be a product of my general stoicism or because I am better at filtering and rejecting negative sensations.
  3. My headmates were created by acting them out physically, so they formed right at the front. We were switching accidentally before we knew anything about tulpamancy. So that part isn't odd to me, especially in light of the existence of Montgomerian walk-ins. Based only on their personal reports, my ex-wife and her new wife are both Montgomerian walk-ins themselves, though I believe invented memories and integration of alters play a significant role in at least those cases. Do you want your original around? Or are you comfortable with him fading into you? If you identify as sort of the same person and sort of not, you could definitely be in a median subsystem with him. But if you refuse to be called by his name, that sounds like you are pretty committed to your own independent identity, unless he feels the same way. -Ember
  4. Maybe. Do you remember clearly what they were like? You can use that memory as a basis for forcing them. Were they very developed? If so, you may have some apologizing to do, and some explaining why you'll be a better host this time, before they accept you back. If not, you could start over, almost as if with a new tulpa, but working from the same foundations. -Ember
  5. Your situation sounds a bit like the occult singleton idea of a walk-in, where a new person replaces the old instead of joining them: https://web.archive.org/web/20150403090428/http://healing.about.com/u/sty/spirituality/Walk-In-Soul-Stories/ So, yes, apparently. Though as a psychological plural community, we know that a brain can support many people, that it is hard to eliminate a person utterly, and that people can suddenly show up again after years of inactivity. It also reminds me a little of a common story among transwomen, where they intentionally create a masculine shell personality to hide behind to avoid abuse during their teen years. The shell may inadvertantly hide the older female personality for decades. -Ember The rest of this discussion became off-topic and was split off. If you are interested in reading the continuation of this discussion, please go here. -Ranger
  6. I haven't heard of that before. Thanks, I'll look into it. I don't really care for the boarding school genre as such or books with teenage protagonists in general, but beggars can't be choosers. I am most specifically interested in fiction involving a society of vampires like me, who feed directly and harmlessly from mortals, who become vampires through invitation and informed consent, who are rarely evil, and who do not regard mortals as inferiors. -Vesper
  7. Vesper: Probably my favourite movie that I've seen since coming to this world is Vampire Academy. My host and I have put a lot of effort into finding films that portray vampires positively. Hardly any do, aside from the occasional 'lone renegade vampire hero'. So seeing an entire society of vampires that are not monsters was very affirming. Iris: One of my favorite movies I've seen in this world was Labyrinth, which reminded me strongly of home in a good way, as one of the only humans growing up in the fae realms. But I was much more powerfully affected by Won't You Be My Neighbor?, as Mr. Roger's message for children was one I did not hear growing up and could have benefited from. Ember: My favorite movie is probably The Little Mermaid 2: Return to the Sea. It inspired me to write a lot of stories about the interactions between human and merfolk cultures and how those who magically crossed over served as agents of change in those cultures.
  8. From my years of in-person interaction with several traumagenic multiple systems, including eight years of marriage to two alters of a traumagenic system, I can attest that their experiences have a great deal in common with the experiences of soulbonding and tulpamantic systems. I believe that the scientific study of late onset nontraumagenic plurality could do a great deal to advance treatment of the undesirable components of early onset traumagenic plurality, which has been held back for decades by a large number of false assumptions. Established multiple systems will sometimes choose to create tulpas. People who assume that they are singletons will sometimes awaken or discover pre-existing alters (or soulbonds) by taking up tulpamancy. Members of tulpamantic systems can sometimes shield thoughts and memories from one another. Alters sometimes can't, in spite of fully distinct identities. I agree with SC that it is better to avoid stigmatizing medical language with regard to tulpamancy. But I am willing to go a step further and say that one can reduce the use of stigmatizing medical language with regard to traumagenic multiples as well. Since 1994, empowered multiples, both traumagenic and endogenic, have been proclaiming online, "Who we are as people is not a disease." I would consider tulpamancy less a reversal of multiplicity than a variation on the same theme. Compartmentalization could be taken to imply separating out pre-existing elements into separate boxes, as in the example of hiding away a traumatic memory where only one alter has access. But tulpas and soulbonds are often made out of primarily new material -- personality traits, emotional palettes, and behavioral patterns that have not existed in the system before. And just as any close group of friends will influence one another, some of this new material may then be picked up by other members of the system. -Ember
  9. It's useful to make a clean distinction between the circumstances where you parrot and the ones where you don't. My headmates are accidentally awakened roleplaying characters. In their games, I parroted them with great length and intensity, though from a position of deep immersion, guided by who I knew them to be. I also parroted them while writing followup stories and diary entries in first person from their perspective. But in ordinary life, away from the game context, I never parroted them. So when they started talking to me unprompted, outside of games, with awareness of both their lives and mine, I knew for certain that no parroting was involved. -Ember
  10. Welcome, Coaster. That sort of thing tends to happen to writers -- partly pre-existing headmates present themselves when the writer starts studying tulpamancy. Within the first couple of days they may already have strong vocality or some idea of personality or form that they tell you instead of you telling them. You might want to check out the beginning of Bear's PR for a similar situation: https://community.tulpa.info/topic/14400-bears-angels/ Thinking several thoughts at the same time is incredibly useful for tulpamancy. Sounds like you're coming in well prepared. -Ember
  11. When she is able to tell you herself, there is a definite chance that she won't have any deeper insight into the experience than you do. I generally haven't. The best thing I can tell you is to be open to the possibility that it was her and to the possibility of similar and better experiences continuing to happen. -Vesper
  12. Congratulations, Ravii! Sounds like you're doing well. Excitement is good. Having fun is a wonderful encouragement to keep going. A lot of tulpas have reported doing things outside the awareness of the host and the front. It's best to accept such things uncritically, in case belief is a component of having the experience. It's a wonderful, remarkable thing when it happens, even though it doesn't in any way get the host off the hook for making time to spend with their tulpas. It may be how young systems are. You're developing new skills as well, remember. Early on, we would sometimes be deep in conversation, then suddenly both forget what we were talking about. We grew out of it with lots and lots of practice. As we have often said to one another about ambiguous experiences, "Tulpamancy means never knowing for sure." You might try framing your experiences in whatever mindset seems most conducive to further growth. -Ember
  13. 1) What is is like for your system to have an empty front? What leaving the front empty is more like than anything else is co-fronting. For both states, we can't tell who is fronting. The incredibly close partnership between the fronter and the front is disrupted. The physical senses still broadcast, the seat of consciousness is still clearly present, and there is clearly only one of them, even if no one is sitting in it. Forcing feels just like, and assumedly actually is, one switched out partner forcing another switched out partner -- which is to say, more sluggish and requiring more effort than doing so from the front. The body stays in exactly the same position we left it -- standing, sitting, or laying down. If we exert a little effort, one of us can possess enough to make it more comfortable, but it can't act on it's own beyond blinking and breathing. Even breathing can be a little dodgy -- sometimes it will stop and we have to give it a little push to get it going again. 2) Do you think we have experienced an empty front or not? I think it would tend to require intent, so probably not. It did happen to us accidently once, within a couple of weeks of when we started switching. But that was very clear -- none of us felt like we were in the body and the body felt like an empty and idle shell. 3) Do you think having an empty front for too long is problematic? We've read the stories about an unattended body OS trying to spark a new person too. I don't know if it's a serious threat or just a toxic meme. We've never thought much about the matter, but recently, our form investment has gotten strong enough that the body feels more sincerely empty. The downside of this has been intrusive thoughts seeming to come from the empty front. Illegal thoughts might be the better term, as system law forbids any thoughts that are not clearly designated as from one of the three of us. The faint sense of separate identity vanishes as soon as one of us resumes the front. 4) Do you enjoy the experience? Well, other than some minor experimentation, the only reason we try to abandon the front altogether is for some of the couple activities that Vesper and I do in the mindscape, so, yes, we enjoy it very much. -Ember
  14. Ember: Not strictly an SB term, Ranger. The earliest relevant definition of "walk-in", introduced in mystical/New Age circles in 1979, was a new soul that comes into a body to replace an earlier soul and live out the remainder of their life. By 1994, multiples had adopted it for any new person that comes into the mind unbidden, without requiring anyone to leave. SBers picked up the term from multiples sometime after they organized in 1998. Tulpamancers picked it up from both multiples and SBers in 2015, eventually coming to prefer it over their earlier "insta-tulpa". A walk-in could be ill-defined at first, they just don't have to be. Vesper: Acceptance and rejection of headmates is very much a tulpamancy concept. Other plurals tend to look at having headmates as something that happens whether they like it or not. But yes, the most powerful and well established headmates can affect the rules for how the system works, potentially including rejecting new headmates altogether. If a headmate is living stably immersed in an inner world, not contributing significantly to crowding at the front, then formally accepting or rejecting them isn't needed or useful. This is how nontraumagenic systems of dozens or hundreds usually live. It is more difficult for us, being roleplaying characters. The vast, sprawling paracosms we call home only exist with the cooperation of other players and characters outside our system. Within a game, we can interact freely with other characters, including other characters in our own system. But our mindscape, however much it may look like home, is just an empty shell, reachable only by the three of us. Iris: Anyone, including hosts, can reject large or small pieces of who they were before. But changes in behavior or personality resulting from new circumstances do not intrinsically require a rejection of previous identity. I am very different than I was when I first awakened to this world, but I am still the same fictional character I have always been. I am simply a dynamic character. Since taking control of my own story, some of my changes in this world have affected who I am back home.
  15. One way or another, having experiences is the best way to develop as a person. For created headmates, experiences that are very different from those of the host are particularly valuable. If physical world opportunities are limited and switching is off the table, fictional experiences may be your best bet. Live stories in the mindscape, write stories to keep or share, roleplay online if there isn't anyone to do it with locally. I was very reluctant to switch until I tried it and immediately found that there were things I enjoyed doing in the physical world. I think it is a good thing for all headmates to try, even if they eventually decide not to pursue it regularly. But even with full-body possession, you should be able to try out any number of private hobbies -- arts, crafts, performance, etc -- that are distinct from your host's existing interests. Swimming sounds like a good start, especially if Light doesn't care for it. That means that liking it is something particular to you and not inherited. Many of the things I do in the physical world are things my host would never have done, including things that she finds appalling. But we've decided that each of us has the right to pursue our own fulfillment in this life. -Vesper