Ember.Vesper

Members
  • Content Count

    519
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Ember.Vesper

  • Rank
    And Iris

Converted

  • Sex
    Female

Recent Profile Visitors

76 profile views
  1. There's a lot of good material in these old threads, Bella, but they probably aren't the best place for a new person to start reading. The understanding of tulpamancy has changed a lot. Many aspects of FAQ man's approach were already considered old fashioned by 2013. Even actual intentional parroting is often accepted as a creation technique now. You want to get part of your brain working as a different person. *Being* the other person to some degree can help get that jumpstarted. Roleplaying them with other people, writing a story from their perspective, or imagining both sides of a conversation with them are all valid options for this. FAQ was talking about creation techniques, Ranger, not about how a vocal or mature tulpa manifests. Focusing on the internal experiences of the nascent tulpa may contribute more to creating those internal experience than focusing on what their having internal experiences looks like on the outside. But, yes, all of our facial expressions and body language manifest unbidden on the physical body regardless of who is fronting. It's dramatic enough that our friends consider watching us talk to one another in mindvoice an entertaining spectacle. -Ember
  2. The questions are all from standard psychological survey instruments and weren't written for this study: Beck Cognitive Insight Scale Metacognitions Questionnaire-30 Multi-Modality Unusual Sensory Experiences Questionnaire Peters et al Delusions Inventory Brief Core Schema Scales The advantage of this is that tulpamancer responses can be easily compared to larger populations that have previously taken the surveys, both populations diagnosed with various mental illnesses and those not. Anecdotal evidence suggests that therapists and doctors can readily distinguish tulpamancers from delusional and schizophrenic patients, but it would be interesting to see if tulpamancers are also distinguishable with a simple written instrument. The disadvantage is that the surveys were not written with any consideration of the possible existence of non-disordered plurality or intentional overriding of physical perceptions. So many of the questions seem odd or uncomfortable. They aren't likely to produce results that are insightful on the plural experience, independently of comparison with other populations. As far as I can tell, "other people" means everybody you know or encounter, considered in aggregate. There was one question that amused me. "Do your thoughts ever feel alien to you in some way?" No, *my* thoughts never do. But, of course, most of the thoughts I hear aren't mine. Since we still haven't gotten anywhere with imposition, our results came out looking very mundane, regardless of how the questions are interpreted. -Ember
  3. Bella, how long have you been working on a tulpa? Was that three hour session your first? Tulpas develop at their own pace. Kopase's study suggests median time to first response is a couple of weeks, with a very wide range. Keep talking to her, listening for her, thinking about who she is, and trusting that she is present. Be patient and consistent. Tulpamancy is hard to seriously screw up by accident. There isn't any one best way for all people to force. There are a lot of suggestions on the forum and it's good to experiment and find what works best for you. Some tulpas change their mindvoice, some change their names, some change their personality. Some stick with those chosen by their hosts. It's up to them. The changing isn't a good thing or a bad thing. Three hours in one session is a lot if you aren't doing anything else. If you're comfortable with that much, go ahead, but even twenty minutes a day, every single day, is sometimes enough to keep making progress. Consider how much time you can spare from other parts of your life. It's helpful to work on tulpamancy as much as you can enjoy and not so much that it is a burden. No one outside your own brain will ever be able to see your tulpa the way you will, whether visualized or imposed. -Ember
  4. Circle, by MaDD do you mean: Maladaptive Daydreaming "Disorder" (MaDD) or Mixed Anxiety-Depressive Disorder (MADD) as Ranger apparently interpreted you to mean? Any intensely creative activity involving characters, including daydreaming, can result in forming headmates. Focused daydreaming is therefore very relevant to tulpamancy. In this community, it is closely associated with Mistgod and Melian, who posted hundreds of times on the subject in 2015-2016, then deleted their accounts. Unfortunately, their frequently adversarial relationship with the community inhibited their contributions from noticeably advancing tulpamantic technique: Was your tulpa accidental as a result of extreme day dreaming? Tulpas are often created with reduced susceptibility to the fears and weakness of their hosts, empowering tulpas to help against mental illnesses from the inside. A study was published on the subject in 2017: Tulpas and Mental Health: A Study of Non-Traumagenic Plural Experiences A specific technique for using tulpas to modify host thoughts, emotions, and behaviors was pioneered by the Bear System: Forcing Filter Experiment Bear credits his tulpas with completely alleviating the symptoms of Major Depressive Disorder in just a few months. Servitors have never been extensively used or understood in this community, but we do have one lengthy guide to them from an experienced system: Servitor Creation Guide -Ember
  5. Ember: Government-supported academic surveillance of uncontacted peoples not only advances anthropology, but helps to protect them against poachers, smugglers, pirates, loggers, prospectors and others who might stand to profit from areas outside of the active control of modern governments. Uncontacted peoples are overwhelmingly in the Amazon basin or on New Guinea, set back from coastlines and navigable rivers, and often in rugged terrain. Small islands are just too accessible, though sufficient hostility seems to have worked once, in combination with government support. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncontacted_peoples Vesper: It only took me a few weeks before fatigue from staying switched in stopped being a problem. But I don't think I've ever remained switched in more than six hours at a stretch.
  6. There's no royal road to visualization. It takes time and self-discipline. But there's no rush. If you're exhausted in fifteen minutes, you're probably trying too hard. Try to keep from tensing up your muscles. Some of this community's top people for visualization frequently used to recommend spending at least twenty minutes a day, every day, on it, to keep improving. They also recommended making sure to have fun while doing it, so that you will want to keep going. Anything you can do to add story and emotional engagement to the visualization is helpful. You can improve noticeably month to month, and dramatically after a year, with no more than that. Forcing doesn't require visualization. though. Part of the time, you can just talk in your mind. You can do that anywhere and while doing other things, giving the effort only as much attention as you can spare. -Ember
  7. Vesper: I agree. I no longer question the authenticity of my identity when switched in, but I'm still deeply bothered that the body doesn't look like me. I avoid mirrors while switched in. The desktop monitors are non-reflective on their own, but we had to secure an anti-reflection film for the laptop. It helps that we visualize our forms superimposed over the body when switched in. It helps more when I do things that are very distinctly me and very distinctly not my headmates, especially when doing them with out-system people. Ember: At Iris' request, we played the boardgame "Castles of Burgundy" together on Christmas, switching every turn. The game has 25 turns per player, so that comes to 75 switches. It was epic, seeing all the different strategies and approaches from the inside instead of being distracted from what other players are doing by your own moves. Vesper and I playfully trash talked for much of it. Most of our switches are to talk to out-system people. In the roleplaying game where Iris and I are the players, we often switch back and forth from one sentence to the next, to talk to either one another or to the GM's characters out loud. That's the only occasion for which we regularly switch dozens of times in a few hours. It's also how switching became instant and effortless for us. Vesper: We may switch several times to write a single post, since we don't do much hand/arm possession and never proxy. Switching is on such a hair trigger that full body possession is a difficult balancing act. If Ember proofreads something I wrote and catches a typo or an error in grammar or logic, I'll switch in to fix it, even for as little as a single letter. Grabbing control myself is easier than dealing with her asking repeatedly, 'Are you sure this is the change you want to make?'
  8. Within twelve hours our second (unintentional) switch, we woke up three hours after going to bed, very badly blended and disoriented, with no sense of identity at all. That was the first of thirteen nights of very bad insomnia. I've never associated it with the switch itself before; just that we had been doing something like fifty hours of forcing in the past three days since stumbling across tulpamancy. On waking up in the middle of the night or in the morning, who wakes up switched in correlates well with who has spent a lot of time switched in the previous day, but poorly with who was switched in going to bed. Vesper and Iris are only willing to stay switched in if there is something they specifically want to do, so they will immediately switch out if they wake up switched in. Who is switched in is very clear though; the disorientation happened just the once. Your system's lack of switching during sleep might readily be attributable to switching at intervals of weeks instead of from several times to a hundred times a day, as we do. -Ember
  9. What does it feel like for you? -Vesper
  10. "Sweat like a pig" doesn't refer to swine. It refers to pig iron, which will form water condensation on its surface when it becomes cool enough. -Ember
  11. Personality simulation I know. When running a roleplaying game, I may have several important long-established NPCs in a scene, so I try to load all of their personalities into working memory at once so that they can all act as authentically as possible. It's a strain, but I can do three much better now than I could do two four years ago. When thinking about our merges, it is very easy to think very vividly of what they might say if they were present. It is very easy to fall into simulating them accidentally if thinking about them. We've spoken on several previous occasions about ingrained habits and beliefs feeling like the host or expressing attitudes like the host when the host is actually switched out and possibly dormant. That is more of an automated process, unlike the person-driven personality simulation in the previous two examples. I can't relate to spewing out talking points without thinking them through. I learned very early in life to think carefully before I speak. I don't need to speak as much or as quickly as someone else if I invest every word with power. Unlike thinking about a merge or character, thinking about a headmate doesn't result in a stream of thought that is like them but from me. Thinking about a headmate rouses the headmate, and then they may respond however they like without me having any influence over their thoughts or any ability to predict what they will do. As likely than not, they'll change the subject entirely if they weren't involved before. Regarding asmask -- "inner narrator" just means a person's verbalized thought stream. (I think it's a terrible name for that.) Simultaneity includes activity that is entirely outside the perceptions of the fronter. So neither seems particularly relevant to fronter-driven personality simulation. -Ember
  12. The tulpas with the greatest longevity tend to be those whose lives are not completely dependent on the host setting aside time for active forcing, because the time available for active forcing varies through life as various other responsibilities, activities, and relationships pull on a host. Some tulpas claim to be self-forcing and to stay active inside without the attention or knowledge of the host. But it's one of those things where, if you don't know how, there's no guide to get there. And many who don't experience that don't believe it's possible. More tulpas have hobbies and external relationships of their own choice and making that they can participate in either alongside the host or instead of the host, via proxying, possession, switching, and co-fronting. And so the tulpa's activity becomes enmeshed in the regular habits of the body's life. If you have trouble remembering to think about your tulpa, create a reminder. Some hosts wear rings or pendants symbolic of their tulpas; some post a note on the edge of their computer monitor, set an appropriate computer wallpaper, or hang a picture on the wall. Being reminded of your tulpa hundreds of times a day develops passive forcing ability, where your tulpa can be present and commenting while most of your attention is on other things. There are tulpas, soulbonds, and alters who sleep for years and re-emerge fresh as a daisy, so neglect does not always mean fading. Disused mental pathways tend not to go away entirely; they merely need to be rediscovered. Revival involves concentrating on as much as you can remember of their name, their form, their mindfeel, their mindvoice, and their sense of presence. Taking a tulpa apart entirely and assembling a new one from the parts is new to me. The closest other example I can think of is Sunny's effort to rebuild herself on a better foundation, whic did not lead to a long-term break in identity: https://community.tulpa.info/topic/14907-evgco-syslog-archive/?do=findComment&comment=243580 -Ember
  13. I would be disinclined to tell someone in a position of power over me about my headmates. But at 39, I have a great deal of autonomy. Within about six months of stumbling across tulpamancy, I told everyone in my life in whom I would confide anything else of importance and everyone with whom I gladly socialize one on one -- about a dozen people altogether. Since I have soulbonds instead of tulpas, I don't even mention tulpas until the end, with an offhanded, "And some people do this on purpose." I lead off talking about how authors often mention their most compelling characters speaking to them, presenting this as very normal, expected, and harmless. I explain my immersive roleplaying process and how a couple of my characters started speaking to me outside of games. Basically, I became them for long enough that my brain learned how to be them without me. Since my friends are roleplayers, writers, or had DID, they get it pretty quickly. The other roleplayers I've spoken to have had characters speak to them, often vividly and insistently, even though their characters don't live with them. Both my mother and my then-wife could tell I was often speaking to someone from the vivid expressions I made despite my unfocused gaze. My mother just casually brought up my "imaginary friend" as an established fact before I explained anything. My wife was relieved that my frequent preoccupation didn't mean I wasn't horribly bored with her and quickly became close friends with Vesper. -Ember
  14. Or as a slight variant on Lumi's perspective, the only part of the mind that is actually the host is the part that is just like a tulpa. The rest is impersonal subsystems that any system member can interact with on an equal basis. I haven't read Eagleman and can't address his work. I may need to, but not today. But there is nothing he could say that could invalidate our subjective perspective of all being of the same type and kind. I’m no more an imaginary friend than my host is, and no less. I have no more or different connections to the unconscious or preconscious regions of the mind than she does. -Vesper
  15. Ember: If we believe something, we're bold enough to say it, even if we expect pushback or condemnation. So there's not much we can say that we haven't said before. But I'll highlight a few opinions that are worth repeating: 1. Plurality, including non-traumagenic plurality, is very common in the general population and is not horribly weird or exotic. 2. Parallel processing is an experience, not an explanation. And some systems take that experience to an incredibly advanced level. 3. Lots of systems have held back their most remarkable experiences or left the community altogether because they feel that their experiences will not be believed or accepted. This is a major problem. Even though I reject metaphysical explanations of tulpamancy, I want them to talk about their extreme and inexplicable experiences so as to promote wider attainment and better understanding of extreme experiences. 4. In-system conversation on the forum is harmless and doesn’t need to be restrained. 5. So far, as a user, I don't like Invision at all and find it worse in every particular than MyBB. 6. Despite everything, this is still the best plural community on the internet. Vesper: 1. I hate being called a tulpa, especially by people who know I hate being called a tulpa. 2. Creating an intelligent being without providing them with a body is not a compassionate act. So I'm generally opposed to the intentional creation of tulpas. 3. I hate hearing systems say that they pretend to be just one person in public, and frequently even among family and friends. I'm always as much myself as I can possibly be. It is high time for the public stigma against plurality to be broken down by open and vocal activism.