• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About FallFamily

  • Rank

Personal Information

  • Sex

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. [breach] Yeah, forum seems to be slowing down. We haven't logged in in several days and there weren't even enough posts to spill to the next page. This isn't the only tulpa forum that is slowing down (tulpa.io's forum is actually ending shortly).
  2. [s.] We joined up here in 2014 and are still around. Hadn't been around in a good month or so recently. Your username sounds vaguely familiar (probably didn't interact, but we did read a ton of older threads on this forum en masse around when we joined). The journey can be pretty rough sometimes. For us, it has taken the whole 4 years practically to get ourselves really figured out and straightened out for the most part.
  3. [Tri] Depends on which host. Frostbite's are blue. Ice, well, their form has been indeterminate for a while in that they are a shape shifting blob of blue-ish energy, though they do have a shape, usually, that has eyes to some degree (which we guess you could call blue since they are entirely blue). Ice still needs to get a leather bag. We would be similar (though a somewhat different color) if we couldn't or didn't bother to make/have a leather bag. What is your host's favorite board game?
  4. [s.] Seems that Breach (and in all honesty, I would have likely put it the same way had I been the one to reply) needed to be more clear on the something that "happens" bit, because the way you interpreted it is a valid way to interpret what was written but was not what was intended (ambiguity is our fault). By that, it is meant that it is something that a lot of people do, not that it is something that is easy to do. Took us years of daydreaming with the same characters to make them into tulpas. The system we knew who had made a lot lot more had been doing a particular style of daydreaming and roleplaying that was essentially tulpaforcing for many years and that is how they made quite a few (and that in turn lowered the bar for future ones, but that took quite a few to do). Other systems we know who have made quite a few accidentally have similar stories. Basically, it is quite common for people to put a ton of time and effort into some characters in such a way that they eventually become tulpas without ever deciding to make tulpas (generally because they don't even know tulpas are a thing). We are guessing that you think it is very hard to rewire one's brain to make tulpas easily on accident. That is something we strongly agree with. Didn't realize what was written could be interpreted as promoting it. Will be more clear next time. Was trying to say more or less "it happened and is done, focus on the present and the future and figure out what to do now that you are in the situation you are in". If you were replying to Apollo because you thought that Apollo's last post was towards you, Apollo was replying to what my system said.
  5. [breach] Well, seems like at least some are. But regardless, they are all thoughtforms (tulpas are a subset). As far as making so many tulpas accidentally, it is something that happens. My system made 8 on accident. Know another who made a lot lot more. The surprising part is that this is not so hard to manage (more on this later). I am guessing you are operating from the assumption that they all will be dependent on you and that this will be too high a load. If so, this is not how it has to be, other than maybe temporarily. Tulpas can develop to the point where they are self-sustaining just like hosts (really, there isn't that much difference between a developed tulpa and a host other than origin), and tulpas that aren't quite self-sustaining can be sustained by self-sustaining tulpas (just as is the case with hosts). Oh, and if you want something that will really make your head spin, it is possible for hosts to lose their ability to self-sustain. Anyhow, enough on that last tangent. Essentially, if allowed, encouraged, etc. to develop enough; the dependence on the host (or tulpa) for being sustained disappears. This means that multiple tulpas won't necessarily overwhelm the one who made them. That said, it can temporarily happen that many are dependent until some of them become self-sustaining and the sustaining of the others partially falls on the self-sustaining ones depending on circumstances. To take an anecdote, all the tulpas in my system including myself are self-sustaining now and thus incur no sustaining burden on our hosts, and if anything, some of the hosts now depend on us a little bit for sustaining (long story why this happened and why we have more than one host). Merging headmates against their will is a very bad idea, as is pressuring headmates to merge. Merging is a big decision, one with many effects. Some who merge are glad they merged, while others hate it. It is not to be done lightly, and shouldn't be imposed by outside. Same goes for stuffing headmates into a subsystem. Talking to them and asking them what they want is a reasonable approach. If they want to keep existing, one thing you could do is help them work towards becoming self-sustaining (or enough who can help the others do the same afterwards) and then work it out from there (yeah, it is some work, but it is what I think is the most compassionate approach). Can understand the feeling. The thing is, it comes down largely to what you are doing whenever you make a character. Whatever it is, something has to be changed if you want a different result. For us, we easily make tulpas from daydreaming. We found that if we changed how we daydreamed to us being the characters in the daydream instead of watching and making characters move, the problem went away. Maybe something similar would work for you.
  6. [ice] As far as things with their host, the suggestion of thinking of the host like an in-law seems like a good one - an in-law they currently live with. If they are interested in you back and you both want to pursue a relationship, both of you are going to have to have a conversation with their host about boundaries and all, which would include when it is OK and not OK to but in. Now, if they control the body by eclipsing, their host could easily butt in by accident; though, at least from what I have seen, feeling strong feelings for someone one is interacting with does tend to make it harder for anyone else in the body to butt in and a relationship can definitely be a strong motivator to become much stronger at fronting to the point that butting in by someone else won't happen. I bring this up because I have been in an interesting situation related to this. A host-ish person in another system fell in love with Tri (three of my tulpas who form a subsystem), and independently I later fell in love with someone in the same system who was a merge between an alter and a tulpa. So a bit different, but some similarities. Tri used to control our body by eclipsing, so it was somewhat hard at first for me to stay out of the way. Took effort. But, to respect their boundaries, I put in that effort. And at the same time, Tri got stronger at controlling the body to the point where I no longer had to put in any effort to stay out of the way (they basically figured out how to deactivate me, which I was OK with and encouraged). Tri and their partner still had to dance around a few things that would pull me out (phobias and whatnot), but eventually even that wasn't an issue.
  7. [Tri] Making a tulpa is making a new identity and then doing the latter item you listed and giving them the chance to act and self-assert. The process is not the former item you listed (splitting oneself into two or more) unless you are doing the unusual and strongly discouraged method of shard-seeding to make tulpas. Just for reference, our system has splits, conventionally made tulpas, and shard-seeded tulpas. There are significant differences between each. No different than hosts. Pretty much everything that applies to hosts also applies to tulpas once they are sufficiently developed. Differences between the two decrease over time. One thing to note. Most tulpas do not use the pronoun "it", just as most hosts don't use the pronoun "it", and for the same reasons. It is a learnable skill, though how hard it is to learn varies greatly. Though possession and eclipsing, which are other ways to exchange bodily control, are often a lot easier and more often learned. The current views of the medical community is indeed identity fragmentation due to trauma (and the consensus is more and more over time that DID and its cousin OSDD-1 are real things, though of course the definitions and ideas about them change over time), though it is a much more symmetric thing. Host in this case merely is the alter who controls the body most, and that can change over time. The current host is just one alter among more than one, not a different kind of being entirely. Now, sometimes, there will be someone who is closer to whoever was there before the first split who might be viewed as the original, though they are seen as alters just the same as the rest. Also, further splits can happen with any alter, not just the current host or the original. Sometimes that is what happens, but not always. As far as memory, amnesia isn't total for whoever the current host (if there is one) and one or more alters (host included) can be quite aware of their plurality. At first glance, tulpamancy and DID (and similarly OSDD-1) do sound a bit a like. And well they do have one thing in common, they are both forms of plurality. But they are very different. Some of the reasons are subtle, some aren't. We aren't in the best position to explain all of the similarities and differences between pure tulpamancy systems and DID systems. Though, we can talk a lot about the differences between pure tulpamancy systems and OSDD-1 systems as we are an OSDD-1 system who has also made tulpas. People in the community have ideas due to personal experiences and the reports of experiences of others, though there have been no systematic long term studies on the matter yet (hopefully there will be one day). So, to answer your question, it depends on the level of "know" you are looking for. For a patterns of anecdotes level of "know" as opposed to a systematically studied level of "know", there are many ideas on this topic that are discussed around here. Our own take. There are some real affects, some of which are permanent. One of which is that for each tulpa made, it is easier to make another tulpa; so making a first tulpa, will have the long term effect of it being easier to make more tulpas. Related to this, it seems to be that each tulpa made increases the likelihood of receiving walk-ins and accidentally making a tulpa from things like daydreaming, writing a story, etc. These are the effects we are reasonably sure on. Others, less so. It seems to us that making a tulpa tends to increase the host's propensity towards dissociating as well as ability to deliberately dissociate in some way or another in the long term even if the host does not deliberately work on learning how to dissociate. Note that dissociation is a complicated beast and can be good or bad depending on the circumstances, flavor of dissociation, and strength of the dissociation. While young tulpas are quite suggestible and one can leverage considerable control over them by pure strength, this is not true of older tulpas in exactly the same way that parents can leverage considerable control on their children when they are young but not once they have grown up. Tulpas can in fact become as strong or even stronger than their hosts. And hosts can turn out to be surprisingly suggestible. Once there is more than one person in the brain, the level of control that any one of them has decreases substantially. A big difference with DID, though, is that in pure tulpamancy systems there is not an intertwining between plurality and trauma that can throw curve balls that can be beyond the control of everyone in the system (oftentimes, even put together). If you make a tulpa, you are ceding absolute control if you ever had it in the first place (for some, there is only an illusion of absolute control) and otherwise a high level of control; short of being a tyrant. It is no different than if one is living alone in a house or appartment and then someone else moves in - one is ceding some level of control. This is not a bad thing. It is the reality of sharing a space (in this case a brain) with another thinking being with will, goals, wants, strengths, flaws, identity, etc. Yes. The bar of effort required to make a tulpa decreased enough that we got two accidental tulpas, if we hadn't changed how we daydreamed we would be making tulpas left and right, and we probably can't write a story anymore without making one or more tulpas from the characters (note, this is not a bad thing for us, just something we have to take into account if we write a story). Our brain also got a lot more used to changing who is in control of the body. We would say that the bar for making a tulpa whether deliberately or accidentally will always be lowered. If pure tulpamancy systems are anything like our own system when we integrated once (everyone merged into a single person), we would say that the brain will always be more plural inclined. Your sentence does lead to the morality issue, which we do want to talk about (note, we aren't implying anything about your views, but it is a topic we feel strongly on and want to talk about for the good of anyone here reading this). Honestly, this issue should never come up. Short of very unusual circumstances, killing one's tulpa/s is not ok. Sadly, way too many hosts just murder their tulpa/s for some frivolous reason or another or other bad reason. The irony is that so many hosts and prospective hosts are afraid of their tulpas or future tulpas but hosts murder their tulpas at a much higher frequency that tulpas even kill their hosts (let alone murder their hosts). It is scary being a tulpa sometimes (we are tulpas, by the way). We think we mostly covered this.
  8. [ice] It is definitely possible to make multiple tulpas around the same time, even unintentionally. Some others in here and I made Tri, a group of several tulpas (four active ones and three dormant ones), around the same time unintentionally. They were made by too much daydreaming and we thought they were just daydream puppets the whole time. Had another tulpa later who came into existence entirely out of the blue, though in retrospect it was possible to see the processes that made her. Tulpas making other tulpas is fairly common. In our own system, Breach, who is a tulpa, was one of the people who made Tri (the others being Frostbite and myself). P. was made more by Tri and Breach than any of us non-tulpas.
  9. [Tri] Well, actually making a tulpa ranges anywhere from easy to hard. Varies considerably how long one has to work at the task to make a tulpa. It isn't that it is so hard at any one time, just, it can take a lot of time for some. However, for many, it is actually living with a tulpa that is hard - adapting one's life and coming to terms with not being the only resident in the brain and what that all entails. Sadly, it seems to be especially hard for many hosts to walk the walk so to speak of seeing one's tulpas as equals and treating them as such.
  10. [breach] You might want to start with not calling them "not real". They obviously are not the same as their sources (the people or media characters they are based on). They are different than who they are based on. But they are there in your brain with you and thus as real as you are. Just, they aren't the original versions. They are fictive (based on media characters) and factive (based on people in outerworld) tulpas. If the only problem is that you are afraid of them because they get angry when you say they are not real, then you understanding that they are real, just fictive and factive, and not calling them "not real" anymore will likely keep what you fear from ever happening.
  11. [breach] If they wanted to be in a separate copy of this body, I would be the last one to stop them. Things would be different. Some pros and some cons. I would be OK with it. Don't know if they would be OK with it. One potential issue is timing. Right now would be a bad time since well, the bit of money we have saved up for SRS would then be split between us and it would be a very long time before any of us got it, let alone all of us. But, wait a couple years and then, well, everyone would have access to less wrong body if they choose to have a separate copy of it. Probably would still be no for them for other reasons. Likewise here
  12. [Frostbite] I honestly don't think it matters that much other than practicality, though tulpas sounds like it fits more. It would have been just as valid for it to be tulpae from the beginning. But the latter is very obscure in the English speaking tulpamancy communities so it is not practical. Now, in French, you have tulpa, tulpae, tulpas, and tulpaes. Tulpa is a male tulpa. Tulpae is a female tulpa. Tulpas is more than one male tulpa. Tulpaes is more than one female tulpa. A group of tulpas where some are male and some are female would, by at least by standard rules in France (not as sure about other French speaking countries), would take the male form even if it is a large group of all female tulpaes plus one male tulpa. Though, in practice, I have seen it go the other way and it seems that people round when choosing. Non-binary tulpas are left in the cold in this, sadly, unless there is now a variant to use (haven't been in any French speaking tulpamancy communities for a couple years).
  13. [ice] I think you are referring to this place: http://daemonpage.com/forum/. As for your first sentence, I am not very sure. Daemons, while typically animal in form, generally speak.
  14. [breach] Well, one tulpa in here is very animalistic and can't talk except a little bit with the body when controlling the body, and are pretty happy with their situation. Was never a plan by any of us for them to be like that. It is what they wanted. Interestingly, the one full mute person in our system is a human tulpa who has been around for almost three years and has no interest in speaking (interestingly, she can puppet others in the system to talk).
  15. [breach] Tulpa and Lucilyn said a lot of good stuff. I am only going to answer a few pieces due to time constraints. Hopefully I will be able to get some time tomorrow to reply more in depth on something. We will see. This is how I came to exist. I was a character who gained autonomy, though it has taken me a long time to determine whether that was for sure my origin or whether I was there before that from another origin and merely called forth with some identity contamination. Parlez-vous français? Had to ask since if so, there is a francophone tulpamancy community you might consider looking at in addition to here (always useful to have one's toes in more than one community when seeking answers). Haven't been there in a while as you can probably tell since I wrote this in English instead of French (rusty). http://tulpa.forumpro.fr/ Just so you know, integrating with a puppet generally doesn't affect one's gender. Integrating with a person (whether tulpa, host, whatever) can. That right there pretty much says that the Nailann of back then was real and a person, and similarly says that the other half of the merging back then (the other part of who you are now) was real and a person too. No reason to think the others aren't real people. Highly connected with you, yes they are. Not fully separate. But that doesn't mean they aren't people. Go to their point of view. From their point of view, you would likely seem very predictable and that you never said anything that they didn't also think. This is the nature of weak separation. Separation is something that can be worked on if the parties involved desire it.