Tulpas: Have you ever punished your host? LOL

[Summer]

Of course! Nihi needs some punishing when he is being naughty. >.>

[Bliss]

I find it interesting that the title holds an 'LOL.' It feels like an uncomfortable laugh that follows a statement that was not supposed to be vocalized but it's out before further reflection occurred.

 

Also, answer set doesn't allow for a more thoughtful response, such as simply 'no.' without caveats. Punishing someone isn't terrible if it's appropriate, but it also depends on how the word itself is being utilized. In this sense, punitive measure sounds immature, and passive aggressive. (Explains the laugh?) How about an answer set that encompasses 'no, we're mature adults and can discuss our differences peacefully, even compromise.' Punishment in the context of child rearing is appropriate; consequences help children learn. Using this context, the question denotes the host is a child. It is theoretically possible the host is a child and requires a parental voice; a child sophisticated enough to have created a tulpa, though, is likely to be more advance than stereotypical punitive measures. Positive punishment means you give something to the host to help extinguish a certain behavior. Negative punishment means you take something away to extinguish a behavior. Host is smoking, you want to help them quit and you agree to give stimulus or remove stimulus to help them achieve the goal; this is technically punishment. You could also reward good behavior by giving stimulus, a positive reinforcement, or by taking a way something unpleasant, negative reinforcement. Not punishment.

 

Ultimately, in any adult to adult relationship, any acts of punishment is inappropriate. Adults are free to choose their own paths. In a host to host relationship, if one host doesn't like the behavior of the other host, they cease having a relationship. Getting vengeance is not punishment, as it isn't designed to extinguish behavior or be helpful, and will ultimately exasperate wounds, or escalate behaviors. In a host tulpa relationship, the ceasing relationship is more difficult. Not impossible. Hypothetically, if I felt the need, I could retreat so far into the recesses of my host mind I would never be found. None of his behavior can harm me.

 

My host, 'host' by community definition, is my companion. He is an adult. We hold a loving relationship. Throwing tantrums, getting even, or punishing are not attributes of a loving relationship. Loving relationships are not about possession or control. That is high school and drama and evidence of immaturity and or mental health problems. One honors a fellow adult by recognizing their freedom and sovereignty. Interactions are negotiated and agreed upon.

 

So, if your find yourself contemplating punishment with a fellow adult, ask yourself is this response loving? Is this about me or my companion? Am I honoring their sovereignty? Would I want to be equally restricted in thought or behavior. Maybe your answer to the last one is yes. Some people want that, but that, too, is something negotiated. That isn't punishment but rather contractual responses to relationship needs.

[Tewi]

I find it interesting that the title holds an 'LOL.' It feels like an uncomfortable laugh that follows a statement that was not supposed to be vocalized but it's out before further reflection occurred.

 

Well, Melian made the thread. So that's why. Just sort of part of their vocabulary to end things with LOL frequently.

[Dynamo Lux]

The most our system's ever done is ban the original from watching wrestling, and not out of punishment or spite, but genuinely because everyone else hated it and it consumed their fronting time. The original was fine with it since they knew it was turning into an addiction and wasn't productive.

 

Throwing tantrums, getting even, or punishing are not attributes of a loving relationship. Loving relationships are not about possession or control. That is high school and drama and evidence of immaturity and or mental health problems. One honors a fellow adult by recognizing their freedom and sovereignty. Interactions are negotiated and agreed upon.

 

So, if your find yourself contemplating punishment with a fellow adult, ask yourself is this response loving? Is this about me or my companion? Am I honoring their sovereignty? Would I want to be equally restricted in thought or behavior. Maybe your answer to the last one is yes. Some people want that, but that, too, is something negotiated. That isn't punishment but rather contractual responses to relationship needs.

 

This

[solarchariot]

So, Luxio... Perhaps your pro-wrestling friend can help me understand this... Why was wrestling on the Sci-Fi channel? That bothered me a lot!

[Darlene]

Positive punishment means you give something to the host to help extinguish a certain behavior. Negative punishment means you take something away to extinguish a behavior. Host is smoking, you want to help them quit and you agree to give stimulus or remove stimulus to help them achieve the goal; this is technically punishment. You could also reward good behavior by giving stimulus, a positive reinforcement, or by taking a way something unpleasant, negative reinforcement. Not punishment.

 

We believe any society run by adults has the right to perform punitive action to protect society at large. Our system is a society with a very small, very important set of rules that must be withheld so that this life is prosperous, and our quality of life is upheld.

 

The consequences of actions is our only means of guaranteeing safety and security over what we hold most dear.

 

Society will always argue over methods and reasons, but consequences as a deterrent to malicious behavior isn't necessarily the question or even a concern. Rules are in place to allow there to be a fair system in place so that offender and offended can come to an agreement.

 

Consensus demands that there is no doubt, even by the offender. Since our system is capable of knowing the truth of a response, the offender's objective is to minimize consequences, plea bargain, or otherwise make reparations to avoid the stricter means of punishment.

 

We do not take this lightly, therefore we have rules that are only the very minimal and most adaptable.

 

1. Free Will

2. Consensus

3. Immediate Resolution

 

Do you see any rules here for any specific action? There isn't. Instead, we have limited the possibility of wrongdoing to someone who offends against someone or someones such that a resolution is required.

 

I find it unlikely that anyone would ultimately be punished, but these three laws are also the method.

 

Intrusive thoughts can be thought of as offenders, they are tried and banished within moments, a consensus only applies to accepted systemmates, but these laws allow for anything, even forgiveness.

 

Yes, punishment as you describe it would definitely occur given negotiations are settled with a punitive result, by consensus.

[Devin and Sasha]

I have two main methods of punishment.

The first I only implement if Dev keeps doubting and degrading himself, being that I repeatedly say "You are your own enemy" without pause until he stops.

The second is just in general if he starts being rude to me or someone else, being I just give him a headache until he stops it by screaming at him mentally.