Trauma – PTSD

Question:

I was reading a post today and thinking that the poster never, ever, talks about her "others". She always talks about dissociation, very eloquently, with detached rationality. I always, ALWAYS, talk about my others. Sometimes I get embarrased, or better said ashamed, because of this and don’t post alot and hide alot because I think talking about Luthe and the Leutenant is just a way to be full of myself and to hog or control the conversation and make it about me. (Sometimes I feel like that must be why I can’t sustain friendships because I am not a very good partner in a conversation) But then I think it’s just that’s how I talk about dissociation. And that alot of people here who never talk about thier others and talk about dissociation as a not personal thing are just talking about dissociation in the way it’s comfortable for them. But then I start to think that maybe people have rules about not talking about their "others". I’d like to know, if it’s not being to nosey, what rules about talking about "others"  anybody has. I’d like to know just for the fun of discussing it and to learn more about everybody. Anyway, if it makes sense, would anybody care to share? n — For more information about this posting service, contact: If you want an anonymous account, visit our sign-up page: https://asarian-host.net/cgi-bin/signup.cgi

Response:

i’m generally quite willing to talk abt my "others", and am open abt the dx, etc. i’m not quite as comfortable being quite little around ppl. Generally, the rule is to pay attention to how ppl are reacting to me being obviously little (like tonight playing boardgames with friend – was Sunshine most of the night. Her voice is distinctive.), and if it seems like ppl are uncomfortable, we’ll switch out. with ppl who’ve never seen us little, it takes awhile before we’ll be quite little around them, and the kids are always a bit uncertain and shy, particularly, again, because the speaking voice is unmistakable. that’s about it, tho.  it’s the kids’ choice whether they want to come out around someone.  and if we’re talking about someone specific, but that part gets uncomfortable, we generally will stop talking bout them. my general thought, i guess, is that the more understandably weird i am to ppl, the less cr*zy i might seem.  *shrugs* also, though i’m sure it’ll get mentioned, not everyone on this site is multiple, or has others.  my pdoc doesn’t think i’m multiple.  she just thinks i dissociate a lot.  *shrugs* nice talking with you.  :) jt

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I was reading a post today and thinking that the poster never, ever, talks about her "others". She always talks about dissociation, very eloquently, with detached rationality. I always, ALWAYS, talk about my others. Sometimes I get embarrased, or better said ashamed, because of this and don’t post alot and hide alot because I think talking about Luthe and the Leutenant is just a way to be full of myself and to hog or control the conversation and make it about me. (Sometimes I feel like that must be why I can’t sustain friendships because I am not a very good partner in a conversation) But then I think it’s just that’s how I talk about

dissociation. And that alot of people here who never talk about thier others and talk about dissociation as a not personal thing are just talking

about dissociation in – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – the way it’s comfortable for them. But then I start to think that maybe people have rules about not talking about their "others". I’d like to know, if it’s not being to nosey, what rules about talking about "others"  anybody has. I’d like to know just for the fun of discussing it and to learn more about everybody. Anyway, if it makes sense, would anybody care to share? n — For more information about this posting service, contact: If you want an anonymous account, visit our sign-up page: https://asarian-host.net/cgi-bin/signup.cgi

Response:

Dear n – Didn’t know whom you had in mind who doesn’t talk about "others" – but I know that I don’t very often – and that is because I don’t usually have a good sense of any of them.  I used to, more – because the intersection of my bipolar condition and the DID used to create opportunities for certain inside ones to push forward and run amok or make me unhappy, etc. Medication and some therapy have helped with better control for safety and better function.  Not best – but better. A lot of what happens in/for/with me happens w/out my really understanding what is going on in terms of the who-ness.  I know for sure the fluctuations happen because I get blanks in memory and stuff.  And I know for sure that there are certain mechanisms inside for sort of managing information inside so that we all stay safe (or at least relatively pretty safe, and much more safe than we once did). I think that it’s good to talk in whatever way makes sense, here – we are interested in all ways of talking and thinking about whatever is going on w/others who experience dissociative phenomena and splits.  We think it is all so different, and that is why it makes sense to us that there would be different ways of talking about it. We think your contributions are of high value and nothing to feel shy about sharing. Best – Beauty. — To email me, remove "nospam" from my address. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I was reading a post today and thinking that the poster never, ever, talks about her "others". She always talks about dissociation, very eloquently, with detached rationality. I always, ALWAYS, talk about my others. Sometimes I get embarrased, or better said ashamed, because of this and don’t post alot and hide alot because I think talking about Luthe and the Leutenant is just a way to be full of myself and to hog or control the conversation and make it about me. (Sometimes I feel like that must be why I can’t sustain friendships because I am not a very good partner in a conversation) But then I think it’s just that’s how I talk about dissociation. And that alot of people here who never talk about thier others and talk about dissociation as a not personal thing are just talking about dissociation in the way it’s comfortable for them. But then I start to think that maybe people have rules about not talking about their "others". I’d like to know, if it’s not being to nosey, what rules about talking about "others"  anybody has. I’d like to know just for the fun of discussing it and to learn more about everybody. Anyway, if it makes sense, would anybody care to share? n — For more information about this posting service, contact: If you want an anonymous account, visit our sign-up page: https://asarian-host.net/cgi-bin/signup.cgi

Response:

Hi, n, I don’t know if we’ve talked before.  I know I started to respond to a wonderful post you wrote once about listening to Lorn**na McKenn*tt.   I love her music.  Anyway, let’s see if I can finish this response  (I tend to start a lot of things and never finish them.) Yes, I seem to have rules about talking about the insiders.  CS, a very cold, rational, and very punishing insider, does not allow talk about them, or their names to be mentioned.  If he is influencing, or even "in charge",  insiders and anything else related to dissociation is not to be discussed.  Even saying "in charge" if offensive to him.  He doesn’t approve of any talk that identifies us as someone dissociative.  We have only mentioned the insiders by name here,  and in a therapeutic setting. Even with T, however, it is really difficult to talk about the insiders, because CS becomes very ab*sive and controlling.  It is even difficult to explain now, because he has had so much influence since a recent visit to FOO. Also,  CS sometimes convinces me if is wrong to speak about the insiders, because my diagnosis is not DID, but complex PTSD, and DDNOS.  To him (CS) this means that I should stop "acting" DID.  Yet, there are these insiders, who can write,  who can "whoosh" into this body and talk (has only happened with trusted T…..if they whoosh into body in front of anyone else, CS silences them….totally mute.  Since I am generally quiet, it goes unnoticed). Anyway, I often feel like I am doing something wrong or forbidden if I talk about them, or let them talk, so yes, I guess I have rules about talking about them.   Or maybe I should say CS has rules.  And we have rules about who is allowed to know about them.   Almost no one.   Well, I am getting confused now, because, I am definitely breaking some rules here.   dove – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I was reading a post today and thinking that the poster never, ever, talks about her "others". She always talks about dissociation, very eloquently, with detached rationality. I always, ALWAYS, talk about my others. Sometimes I get embarrased, or better said ashamed, because of this and don’t post alot and hide alot because I think talking about Luthe and the Leutenant is just a way to be full of myself and to hog or control the conversation and make it about me. (Sometimes I feel like that must be why I can’t sustain friendships because I am not a very good partner in a conversation) But then I think it’s just that’s how I talk about dissociation. And that alot of people here who never talk about thier others and talk about dissociation as a not personal thing are just talking about dissociation in the way it’s comfortable for them. But then I start to think that maybe people have rules about not talking about their "others". I’d like to know, if it’s not being to nosey, what rules about talking about "others" anybody has. I’d like to know just for the fun of discussing it and to learn more about everybody. Anyway, if it makes sense, would anybody care to share? n

– For info about this service, see http://anon.twwells.com/help/ or e-mail:

Response:

Hi n……. I seem to have acquired a whole set of rule regarding my insiders.  It’s kind of complicated and doesn’t always work, but I guess they’re guidlines at best. I have written here about problems I’ve had with some of the "others."  I know that one of them, (Feeler) has written into the ng on her own a few times in the past.  My insiders are not "allowed" to come out to deal with happenings in rl.  They do, however, come out and talk to the t, and have on occassion, called him with a problem.  In the past, when I’m in a very bad situation, or a dangerous one, Louise (the protector) emerges, and will handle stuff that’s just unmanageable for me.  She does this in a way that ppl do not know it is a "different" Nahanton they’re dealing with.  If I become overcome with fear, she’ll frequently "take over" and get me through it.  Unfortunately, I almost never have memory of this, and only know of the outcome when friends or family inform me that I was "brave" or were surprised at how I handled the problem. There is one insider who wants to do damage to the body, and although she’s been quiet of late, everyone is terrified of her.  She sees us as damaged and soiled, and doesn’t want us around for fear of our soiling her.  She doesn’t understand that if she gets rid of us, she won’t exist any longer either.  She believes she’s an entirely seperate entity. I only talk about these things here as asd and with my t.  I have found (and I’ve mentioned this in earlier posts) that my friends who are very caring, when I explained depression and anxiety to them years ago, have become much too "sensitive" to it and consequently treat me at times with "kid gloves."   I detest being treated as if I were a "rare, fragile species."  I’ve told them this, and they understand, but if something stressful is going on in the group, It seems that they’re always asking me, "if I’m alright with whatever."  I tell them that I’m not made of eggshells, and that they shouldn’t treat me as such.  If they every knew  the rest of it, I can’t imagine how they would react…..maybe, carrying me around on a stretcher??? lol :O).  Consequently, even if I’m feeling down or anxious, I "disappear" from the scene for a while. I don’t even talk about "that" with them any longer.  That makes asd and my t even more important.  Without these things, I’d be terribly isolated and alone in this area of my life. Interesting question n. Nahanton I was reading a post today and thinking that the poster never, ever, talks about her "others". She always talks about dissociation, very eloquently, with detached rationality. I always, ALWAYS, talk about my others. Sometimes I get embarrased, or better said ashamed, because of this and don’t post alot and hide alot because I think talking about Luthe and the Leutenant is just a way to be full of myself and to hog or control the conversation and make it about me. (Sometimes I feel like that must be why I can’t sustain friendships because I am not a very good partner in a conversation) But then I think it’s just that’s how I talk about dissociation. And that alot of people here who never talk about thier others and talk about dissociation as a not personal thing are just talking about dissociation in the way it’s comfortable for them. But then I start to think that maybe people have rules about not talking about their "others". I’d like to know, if it’s not being to nosey, what rules about talking about "others"  anybody has. I’d like to know just for the fun of discussing it and to learn more about everybody. Anyway, if it makes sense, would anybody care to share? n  

Response:

*strengthening and calming thoughts* jt Hi, n, I don’t know if we’ve talked before.  I know I started to respond to a wonderful post you wrote once about listening to Lorn**na McKenn*tt.   I love her music.  Anyway, let’s see if I can finish this response  (I tend to start a lot of things and never finish them.) Yes, I seem to have rules about talking about the

insiders.  CS, a very cold, rational, and very punishing insider, does not allow talk about them, or their names to be mentioned.  If he is

influencing, or even "in charge",  insiders and anything else related to

dissociation is not to be discussed.  Even saying "in charge" if offensive to him. He doesn’t approve of any talk that identifies us as someone

dissociative.  We have only mentioned the insiders by name here,  and in a

therapeutic setting. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Even with T, however, it is really difficult to talk about the insiders, because CS becomes very ab*sive and controlling.  It is even difficult to explain now, because he has had so much influence since a recent visit to FOO. Also,  CS sometimes convinces me if is wrong to speak about the insiders, because my diagnosis is not DID, but complex PTSD, and DDNOS.  To him (CS) this means that I should stop "acting" DID.  Yet, there are these insiders, who can write,  who can "whoosh" into this body and talk (has only happened with trusted T…..if they whoosh into body in front of anyone else, CS silences them….totally mute.  Since I am generally quiet, it goes unnoticed). Anyway, I often feel like I am doing something wrong or forbidden if I talk about them, or let them talk, so yes, I guess I have rules about talking about them.   Or maybe I should say CS has rules. And we have rules about who is allowed to know about them.   Almost no one.   Well, I am getting confused now, because, I am definitely breaking some rules here. dove I was reading a post today and thinking that the poster never, ever, talks about her "others". She always talks about dissociation, very eloquently, with detached rationality. I always, ALWAYS, talk about my others. Sometimes I get embarrased, or better said ashamed, because of this and don’t post alot and hide alot because I think talking about Luthe and the Leutenant is just a way to be full of myself and to hog or control the conversation and make it about me. (Sometimes I feel like that must be why I can’t sustain friendships because I am not a very good partner in a conversation) But then I think it’s just that’s how I talk about dissociation. And that alot of people here who never talk about thier others and talk about dissociation as a not personal thing are just talking about dissociation in the way it’s comfortable for them. But then I start to think that maybe people have rules about not talking about their "others". I’d like to know, if it’s not being to nosey, what rules about talking about "others" anybody has. I’d like to know just for the fun of discussing it and to learn more about everybody. Anyway, if it makes sense, would anybody care to share? n — For info about this service, see

http://anon.twwells.com/help/ or e-mail: – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – help message administrator

Response:

I am afraid of my insiders. Just afraid. I don’t like to talk about them, even with the t. He says it is okay to talk but talking is bad, I think. I don’t want him to think that I am stupid and lying and faking and stuff. jane – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – *strengthening and calming thoughts* jt Hi, n, I don’t know if we’ve talked before.  I know I started to  respond to a wonderful post you wrote once about listening to Lorn**na  McKenn*tt.   I love her music.  Anyway, let’s see if I can finish this  response  (I tend to start a lot of things and never finish them.) Yes, I seem to have rules about talking about the  insiders.  CS, a very cold, rational, and very punishing insider, does not allow  talk about them, or their names to be mentioned.  If he is  influencing, or even "in charge",  insiders and anything else related to  dissociation is not to be discussed.  Even saying "in charge" if offensive to him.  He doesn’t approve of any talk that identifies us as someone  dissociative.  We have only mentioned the insiders by name here,  and in a  therapeutic setting. Even with T, however, it is really difficult to talk about  the insiders, because CS becomes very ab*sive and controlling.  It is  even difficult to explain now, because he has had so much influence since a  recent visit to FOO. Also,  CS sometimes convinces me if is wrong to speak  about the insiders, because my diagnosis is not DID, but complex PTSD, and  DDNOS.  To him (CS) this means that I should stop "acting" DID.  Yet,  there are these insiders, who can write,  who can "whoosh" into this body  and talk (has only happened with trusted T…..if they whoosh into body  in front of anyone else, CS silences them….totally mute.  Since I am  generally quiet, it goes unnoticed). Anyway, I often feel like I am doing something wrong or  forbidden if I talk about them, or let them talk, so yes, I guess I have  rules about talking about them.   Or maybe I should say CS has rules.  And we have rules about who is allowed to know about them.   Almost no  one.   Well, I am getting confused now, because, I am definitely breaking  some rules here. dove I was reading a post today and thinking that the poster  never, ever, talks about her "others". She always talks about dissociation,  very eloquently, with detached rationality. I always, ALWAYS, talk about my others. Sometimes I get  embarrased, or better said ashamed, because of this and don’t post alot  and hide alot because I think talking about Luthe and the Leutenant is  just a way to be full of myself and to hog or control the conversation  and make it about me. (Sometimes I feel like that must be why I can’t sustain  friendships because I am not a very good partner in a conversation) But then I think it’s just that’s how I talk about  dissociation. And that alot of people here who never talk about thier others  and talk about dissociation as a not personal thing are just talking  about dissociation in the way it’s comfortable for them. But then I start to think that maybe people have rules  about not talking about their "others". I’d like to know, if it’s not being to nosey, what rules  about talking about "others" anybody has. I’d like to know just for the fun  of discussing it and to learn more about everybody. Anyway, if it makes sense, would anybody care to share? n — For info about this service, see  http://anon.twwells.com/help/ or e-mail:  help message  administrator

Response:

*caring thoughts* i was held in this state for a very long time.  it was very surprising to me for a long time that my T didn’t tell me i was lying or faking when i did let the others talk. jt

I am afraid of my insiders. Just afraid. I don’t like to talk about them, even with the t. He says it is okay to talk but talking is bad, I think. I don’t want him to think that I am stupid and lying and faking and stuff. jane

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – *strengthening and calming thoughts* jt Hi, n, I don’t know if we’ve talked before.  I know I started to  respond to a wonderful post you wrote once about listening to Lorn**na  McKenn*tt.   I love her music.  Anyway, let’s see if I can finish this  response  (I tend to start a lot of things and never finish them.) Yes, I seem to have rules about talking about the  insiders.  CS, a very cold, rational, and very punishing insider, does not allow  talk about them, or their names to be mentioned.  If he is  influencing, or even "in charge",  insiders and anything else related to  dissociation is not to be discussed.  Even saying "in charge" if offensive to him.  He doesn’t approve of any talk that identifies us as someone  dissociative.  We have only mentioned the insiders by name here,  and in a  therapeutic setting. Even with T, however, it is really difficult to talk about  the insiders, because CS becomes very ab*sive and controlling.  It is  even difficult to explain now, because he has had so much influence since a  recent visit to FOO. Also,  CS sometimes convinces me if is wrong to speak  about the insiders, because my diagnosis is not DID, but complex PTSD, and  DDNOS.  To him (CS) this means that I should stop "acting" DID.  Yet,  there are these insiders, who can write,  who can "whoosh" into this body  and talk (has only happened with trusted T…..if they whoosh into body  in front of anyone else, CS silences them….totally mute.  Since I am  generally quiet, it goes unnoticed). Anyway, I often feel like I am doing something wrong or  forbidden if I talk about them, or let them talk, so yes, I guess I have  rules about talking about them.   Or maybe I should say CS has rules.  And we have rules about who is allowed to know about them. Almost no  one.   Well, I am getting confused now, because, I am definitely breaking  some rules here. dove I was reading a post today and thinking that the poster  never, ever, talks about her "others". She always talks about dissociation,  very eloquently, with detached rationality. I always, ALWAYS, talk about my others. Sometimes I get  embarrased, or better said ashamed, because of this and don’t post alot  and hide alot because I think talking about Luthe and the Leutenant is  just a way to be full of myself and to hog or control the conversation  and make it about me. (Sometimes I feel like that must be why I can’t sustain  friendships because I am not a very good partner in a conversation) But then I think it’s just that’s how I talk about  dissociation. And that alot of people here who never talk about thier others  and talk about dissociation as a not personal thing are just talking  about dissociation in the way it’s comfortable for them. But then I start to think that maybe people have rules  about not talking about their "others". I’d like to know, if it’s not being to nosey, what rules  about talking about "others" anybody has. I’d like to know just for the fun  of discussing it and to learn more about everybody. Anyway, if it makes sense, would anybody care to share? n — For info about this service, see  http://anon.twwells.com/help/ or e-mail: returned  help message administrator  administrator

Response:

*strengthening and calming thoughts* jt

thank youu – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi, n, I don’t know if we’ve talked before. I know I started to respond to a wonderful post you wrote once about listening to Lorn**na McKenn*tt. I love her music. Anyway, let’s see if I can finish this response (I tend to start a lot of things and never finish them.) Yes, I seem to have rules about talking about the insiders. CS, a very cold, rational, and very punishing insider, does not allow talk about them, or their names to be mentioned. If he is influencing, or even "in charge", insiders and anything else related to dissociation is not to be discussed. Even saying "in charge" if offensive to him. He doesn’t approve of any talk that identifies us as someone dissociative. We have only mentioned the insiders by name here, and in a therapeutic setting. Even with T, however, it is really difficult to talk about the insiders, because CS becomes very ab*sive and controlling. It is even difficult to explain now, because he has had so much influence since a recent visit to FOO. Also, CS sometimes convinces me if is wrong to speak about the insiders, because my diagnosis is not DID, but complex PTSD, and DDNOS. To him (CS) this means that I should stop "acting" DID. Yet, there are these insiders, who can write, who can "whoosh" into this body and talk (has only happened with trusted T…..if they whoosh into body in front of anyone else, CS silences them….totally mute. Since I am generally quiet, it goes unnoticed). Anyway, I often feel like I am doing something wrong or forbidden if I talk about them, or let them talk, so yes, I guess I have rules about talking about them. Or maybe I should say CS has rules. And we have rules about who is allowed to know about them. Almost no one. Well, I am getting confused now, because, I am definitely breaking some rules here. dove I was reading a post today and thinking that the poster never, ever, talks about her "others". She always talks about dissociation, very eloquently, with detached rationality. I always, ALWAYS, talk about my others. Sometimes I get embarrased, or better said ashamed, because of this and don’t post alot and hide alot because I think talking about Luthe and the Leutenant is just a way to be full of myself and to hog or control the conversation and make it about me. (Sometimes I feel like that must be why I can’t sustain friendships because I am not a very good partner in a conversation) But then I think it’s just that’s how I talk about dissociation. And that alot of people here who never talk about thier others and talk about dissociation as a not personal thing are just talking about dissociation in the way it’s comfortable for them. But then I start to think that maybe people have rules about not talking about their "others". I’d like to know, if it’s not being to nosey, what rules about talking about "others" anybody has. I’d like to know just for the fun of discussing it and to learn more about everybody. Anyway, if it makes sense, would anybody care to share? n

– For info about this service, see http://anon.twwells.com/help/ or e-mail:

Response:

jane, I know that fear of someone thinking I am lying or faking has be an enormous obstacle for me.  My punishing one, CS, is the one who perpetuates the fear to keep us all silent.  Reading here and allowing my insiders to write here and interact with others here has made them a little bolder.  I don’t know how it works with you, but with me, it is an insider telling me that I am faking, and that other people will think so too.  But, if I am lying or faking, as he says, then, who is he?  The logic doesn’t quite work.   dove – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I am afraid of my insiders. Just afraid. I don’t like to talk about them, even with the t. He says it is okay to talk but talking is bad, I think. I don’t want him to think that I am stupid and lying and faking and stuff. jane *strengthening and calming thoughts* jt Hi, n, I don’t know if we’ve talked before. I know I started to respond to a wonderful post you wrote once about listening to Lorn**na McKenn*tt. I love her music. Anyway, let’s see if I can finish this response (I tend to start a lot of things and never finish them.) Yes, I seem to have rules about talking about the insiders. CS, a very cold, rational, and very punishing insider, does not allow talk about them, or their names to be mentioned. If he is influencing, or even "in charge", insiders and anything else related to dissociation is not to be discussed. Even saying "in charge" if offensive to him. He doesn’t approve of any talk that identifies us as someone dissociative. We have only mentioned the insiders by name here, and in a therapeutic setting. Even with T, however, it is really difficult to talk about the insiders, because CS becomes very ab*sive and controlling. It is even difficult to explain now, because he has had so much influence since a recent visit to FOO. Also, CS sometimes convinces me if is wrong to speak about the insiders, because my diagnosis is not DID, but complex PTSD, and DDNOS. To him (CS) this means that I should stop "acting" DID. Yet, there are these insiders, who can write, who can "whoosh" into this body and talk (has only happened with trusted T…..if they whoosh into body in front of anyone else, CS silences them….totally mute. Since I am generally quiet, it goes unnoticed). Anyway, I often feel like I am doing something wrong or forbidden if I talk about them, or let them talk, so yes, I guess I have rules about talking about them. Or maybe I should say CS has rules. And we have rules about who is allowed to know about them. Almost no one. Well, I am getting confused now, because, I am definitely breaking some rules here. dove I was reading a post today and thinking that the poster never, ever, talks about her "others". She always talks about dissociation, very eloquently, with detached rationality. I always, ALWAYS, talk about my others. Sometimes I get embarrased, or better said ashamed, because of this and don’t post alot and hide alot because I think talking about Luthe and the Leutenant is just a way to be full of myself and to hog or control the conversation and make it about me. (Sometimes I feel like that must be why I can’t sustain friendships because I am not a very good partner in a conversation) But then I think it’s just that’s how I talk about dissociation. And that alot of people here who never talk about thier others and talk about dissociation as a not personal thing are just talking about dissociation in the way it’s comfortable for them. But then I start to think that maybe people have rules about not talking about their "others". I’d like to know, if it’s not being to nosey, what rules about talking about "others" anybody has. I’d like to know just for the fun of discussing it and to learn more about everybody. Anyway, if it makes sense, would anybody care to share? n

– For info about this service, see http://anon.twwells.com/help/ or e-mail:

Response:

am recognizing, for myself, that blue doesn’t really – or hasn’t really – think reality is "real".  so he can comment on the rest of the system’s interaction with the "real" world that he thinks is real *for them*, but it doesn’t matter when the logic doesn’t work in return, because it’s not real *for him*. this prolly won’t help u much. jt – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – jane, I know that fear of someone thinking I am lying or faking has be an enormous obstacle for me.  My punishing one, CS, is the one who perpetuates the fear to keep us all silent.  Reading here and allowing my insiders to write here and interact with others here has made them a little bolder.  I don’t know how it works with you, but with me, it is an insider telling me that I am faking, and that other people will think so too.  But, if I am lying or faking, as he says, then, who is he?  The logic doesn’t quite work. dove I am afraid of my insiders. Just afraid. I don’t like to talk about them, even with the t. He says it is okay to talk but talking is bad, I think. I don’t want him to think that I am stupid and lying and faking and stuff. jane

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – *strengthening and calming thoughts* jt in Hi, n, I don’t know if we’ve talked before. I know I started to respond to a wonderful post you wrote once about listening to Lorn**na McKenn*tt. I love her music. Anyway, let’s see if I can finish this response (I tend to start a lot of things and never finish them.) Yes, I seem to have rules about talking about the insiders. CS, a very cold, rational, and very punishing insider, does not allow talk about them, or their names to be mentioned. If he is influencing, or even "in charge", insiders and anything else related to dissociation is not to be discussed. Even saying "in charge" if offensive to him. He doesn’t approve of any talk that identifies us as someone dissociative. We have only mentioned the insiders by name here, and in a therapeutic setting. Even with T, however, it is really difficult to talk about the insiders, because CS becomes very ab*sive and controlling. It is even difficult to explain now, because he has had so much influence since a recent visit to FOO. Also, CS sometimes convinces me if is wrong to speak about the insiders, because my diagnosis is not DID, but complex PTSD, and DDNOS. To him (CS) this means that I should stop "acting" DID. Yet, there are these insiders, who can write, who can "whoosh" into this body and talk (has only happened with trusted T…..if they whoosh into body in front of anyone else, CS silences them….totally mute. Since I am generally quiet, it goes unnoticed). Anyway, I often feel like I am doing something wrong or forbidden if I talk about them, or let them talk, so yes, I guess I have rules about talking about them. Or maybe I should say CS has rules. And we have rules about who is allowed to know about them. Almost no one. Well, I am getting confused now, because, I am definitely breaking some rules here. dove I was reading a post today and thinking that the poster never, ever, talks about her "others". She always talks about dissociation, very eloquently, with detached rationality. I always, ALWAYS, talk about my others. Sometimes I get embarrased, or better said ashamed, because of this and don’t post alot and hide alot because I think talking about Luthe and the Leutenant is just a way to be full of myself and to hog or control the conversation and make it about me. (Sometimes I feel like that must be why I can’t sustain friendships because I am not a very good partner in a conversation) But then I think it’s just that’s how I talk about dissociation. And that alot of people here who never talk about thier others and talk about dissociation as a not personal thing are just talking about dissociation in the way it’s comfortable for them. But then I start to think that maybe people have rules about not talking about their "others". I’d like to know, if it’s not being to nosey, what rules about talking about "others" anybody has. I’d like to know just for the fun of discussing it and to learn more about everybody. Anyway, if it makes sense, would anybody care to share? n — For info about this service, see

http://anon.twwells.com/help/ or e-mail: – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – help message administrator

Response:

I am afraid of my insiders. Just afraid. I don’t like to talk about them, even with the t. He says it is okay to talk but talking is bad, I think. I don’t want him to think that I am stupid and lying and faking and stuff. jane

I understand about not wanting to talk because you don’t want people to think you’re "stupid or lying or faking and stuff". I feel that way all the time about my best friends. I feel silly/scared writing to the people here at asd that I love because I am afraid of those feelings. But I’m really sorry jane that you are afraid of your insiders. Mine are my friends. I’d find life hard to deal with otherwise. I hope you can find some common ground with the people you have to share your body with. That will be my hope for you tonight. n — For more information about this posting service, contact: If you want an anonymous account, visit our sign-up page: https://asarian-host.net/cgi-bin/signup.cgi

Response:

Hi n…….

Hi, Nahanton. How are you? It’s been a while since we’ve talked, I think. I seem to have acquired a whole set of rule regarding my insiders. It’s kind of complicated and doesn’t always work, but I guess they’re guidlines at best.

Yes, me too. Talk about Luthe but not about Another One Of Us. Don’t use names. Don’t criticize. Don’t correct. Don’t mention anyone in Luthe’s real life. etc. and etc. I guess though, like the Leutenant says if you want respect you have to respect. I have written here about problems I’ve had with some of the "others." I know that one of them, (Feeler) has written into the ng on her own a few times in the past. My insiders are not "allowed" to come out to deal with happenings in rl.

"allowed"? They do, however, come out and talk to the t, and have on occassion, called him with a problem. In the past, when I’m in a very bad situation, or a dangerous one, Louise (the protector) emerges, and will handle stuff that’ s just unmanageable for me. She does this in a way that ppl do not know it is a "different" Nahanton they’re dealing with. If I become overcome with fear, she’ll frequently "take over" and get me through it. Unfortunately, I almost never have memory of this, and only know of the outcome when friends or family inform me that I was "brave" or were surprised at how I handled the problem.

I’m glad she’s there for you like that. …She believes she’s an entirely seperate entity.

Does she beleive you exist then? I only talk about these things here as asd and with my t. I have found ( and I’ve mentioned this in earlier posts) that my friends who are very caring, when I explained depression and anxiety to them years ago, have become much too "sensitive" to it and consequently treat me at times with "kid gloves." I detest being treated as if I were a "rare, fragile species." I’ve told them this, and they understand, but if something stressful is going on in the group, It seems that they’re always asking me, "if I’m alright with whatever." I tell them that I’m not made of eggshells, and that they shouldn’t treat me as such. If they every knew the rest of it, I can’t imagine how they would react…..maybe, carrying me around on a stretcher??? lol :O). Consequently, even if I’m feeling down or anxious, I "disappear" from the scene for a while. I don’t even talk about "that" with them any longer. That makes asd and my t even more important. Without these things, I’d be terribly isolated and alone in this area of my life.

That’s exactly why asd is so important for me too. I don’t talk to *anybody* in real life. There’d be nobody to talk to if I wanted too unless you count paying a t to listen to me. Before asd I used to have to pretend too much. Pretend stories in my head. Pretend friends. Pretend homes. Pretend life. It was very unhealthy I think. It’s funny Luthe thinks he is pretending on asd (if he thinks of it at all which is not very often (EXCEPT: his friends here on asd are real to him! How can they be real to him and I can’t be real? He thinks about you guys a lot. But I’m *not* real. ?!? This is wierd!) Anyway it’s funny that Luthe thinks asd is pretending for him and I know asd is real and my make believe friends and life that I thoughtabout before was pretending. Wierd. I think it would take a dissociative Freud to figure out the convolutions in this one. Sorry to digress, Nahanton. I think you and I have a lot in common. Except I think I;m more comfortable with all of the people I have to share with. We have a lot of the same fears/frustrations about talking. Nahanton

– For more information about this posting service, contact: If you want an anonymous account, visit our sign-up page: https://asarian-host.net/cgi-bin/signup.cgi

Response:

I know that fear of someone thinking I am lying or faking has be an enormous obstacle for me. My punishing one, CS, is the one who perpetuates the fear to keep us all silent. Reading here and allowing my insiders to write here and interact with others here has made them a little bolder. I don’t know how it works with you, but with me, it is an insider telling me that I am faking, and that other people will think so too. But, if I am lying or faking, as he says, then, who is he?  The logic doesn’t quite work. dove

That’s not fair. CS may have a legitimate need to keep you silent, but that’ s not a fair way to do it. Luthe needs me to be silent. I understand that. But Luthe does it in such a way that he thinks *he’s* the one faking. It accomplishes the same thing I guess but seems a kinder way to do it. I’m sorry that CS has to make you sad to protect hirself. n — For more information about this posting service, contact: If you want an anonymous account, visit our sign-up page: https://asarian-host.net/cgi-bin/signup.cgi

Response:

Hi, Beauty! Didn’t know whom you had in mind who doesn’t talk about "others" – but I know that I don’t very often – and that is because I don’t usually have a good sense of any of them. I used to, more – because the intersection of my bipolar condition and the DID used to create opportunities for certain inside ones to push forward and run amok or make me unhappy, etc. Medication and some therapy have helped with better control for safety and better function. Not best – but better.

Wow. This is kind of different from what I experience. That makes your description even more interesting. Isn’t it supposed to be a good thing to develop a conscious sense of your others? To be honest with you, Beauty, I don’t have as good of an understanding as I pretend. There’s someone here I don’t interface with, and I get confused between me and Another One Of Us (confused isn’t the right word, it’s not big enough.) And there might be two here that I don’t know about and I know the Leutenant and Luthe thinks that Another One Of Us and me are the same. Maybe I pretend to understand how *we* work, pretend that I understand there to be just a Luthe and a Leutenant and Another Of Us because the confusion is too scary. What I’m trying to say is maybe you and I are more alike than it first seemed to me and the difference *is* the talking about the others and not the understanding the others. (I don’t think I said what I was thinking above right. Sorry.) A lot of what happens in/for/with me happens w/out my really understanding what is going on in terms of the who-ness. I know for sure the fluctuations happen because I get blanks in memory and stuff. And I know for sure that there are certain mechanisms inside for sort of managing information inside so that we all stay safe (or at least relatively pretty safe, and much more safe than we once did).

That’s the important thing. The rest is just technique. Who-ness is an interesting concept, Beauty. Do you mean it’s like the Japanese philosophy that there’s two of a person; the person themselves and the person who thinks about themselves as a person? I think that it’s good to talk in whatever way makes sense, here – we are interested in all ways of talking and thinking about whatever is going on w/others who experience dissociative phenomena and splits. We think it is all so different, and that is why it makes sense to us that there would be different ways of talking about it.

I agree with you. Alot. We think your contributions are of high value and nothing to feel shy about sharing.

Thank you for saying that, Beauty. I guess I disagree down deep but that’s another topic. n Beauty.

P.S. Beauty, I caught a glimpse of an important post of yours recently about an exerience you had. I’m sorry I didn’t get a chance to really read it and I’m sorry I didn’t get a chance to reply. I wanted to. Did you ever post about your trip to Europe? I missed it if you did. And if you didn’t: why not? — For more information about this posting service, contact: If you want an anonymous account, visit our sign-up page: https://asarian-host.net/cgi-bin/signup.cgi

Response:

First, we are doing well here. Thanks for asking. I read your post to me about this and then accidentally deleted it before replying.:) I was reading a post today and thinking that the poster never, ever, talks about her "others". She always talks about dissociation, very eloquently, with detached rationality.

Isn’t that part of being dissy? *grin* I can talk _about_ dissociation in a very rational, functional, professional manner _or_ I can experience it. It’s very very difficult to do both imo. I always, ALWAYS, talk about my others. Sometimes I get embarrased, or better said ashamed, because of this and don’t post alot and hide alot because I think talking about Luthe and the Leutenant is just a way to be full of myself and to hog or control the conversation and make it about me. (Sometimes I feel like that must be why I can’t sustain friendships because I am not a very good partner in a conversation)

I have read everything you have ever written that I know of and at no time have you (any of you) sounded full of yourself. As for hogging conversations, does this mean there will be more for me to read??? *huge grin* But then I think it’s just that’s how I talk about dissociation. And that alot of people here who never talk about thier others and talk about dissociation as a not personal thing are just talking about dissociation in the way it’s comfortable for them.

Yep, exactly. When I had insiders I talked about them. Or they talked here and talked about me or whatever. Now that I have no insiders (or we are all insiders at the same time, or we _all_ talk here at the same time or WHATEVER) it is harder to talk about them. Note, if English were easier to use in this regard I’d talk about them more But then I start to think that maybe people have rules about not talking about their "others".

Nope. There are a few (were a few. ARGH) who are never outside. They are _only_ insiders. So I/we talked about them less or never but that is true regardless of it if is here or t’py or in a journal. _My_ rules for talking about my dissociation is as I experience it I talk about it. If English gets in my way I’ll babble nonsense until I figure out how to say it. This gives other people stuff to read, which is a good thing I’d like to know, if it’s not being to nosey, what rules about talking about "others"  anybody has. I’d like to know just for the fun of discussing it and to learn more about everybody. Anyway, if it makes sense, would anybody care to share? n

Fortunately (?) for me if I ever tried to say stuff anyone inside didn’t want said my words just went *poof* out of my head. It wasn’t a rule, it was down right annoying! Rainbow Colors (Jill) —      The colors blend, the edges soften. Swirling and mixing                    we are becoming white light.

Response:

Thank you, n, for your kind words.  I am glad that Luthe treats you kindly.  CS has never been kind that I am aware of.   Yes, he does seem to feel a legitimate need to keep others silenced.   But we think he is a bit misguided. The littles are tenacious, and continue seeking ways to get around him.  Can’t get into that right now though. We are enjoying reading your posts. dove – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I know that fear of someone thinking I am lying or faking has be an enormous obstacle for me. My punishing one, CS, is the one who perpetuates the fear to keep us all silent. Reading here and allowing my insiders to write here and interact with others here has made them a little bolder. I don’t know how it works with you, but with me, it is an insider telling me that I am faking, and that other people will think so too. But, if I am lying or faking, as he says, then, who is he? The logic doesn’t quite work. dove That’s not fair. CS may have a legitimate need to keep you silent, but that’ s not a fair way to do it. Luthe needs me to be silent. I understand that. But Luthe does it in such a way that he thinks *he’s* the one faking. It accomplishes the same thing I guess but seems a kinder way to do it. I’m sorry that CS has to make you sad to protect hirself. n

– For info about this service, see http://anon.twwells.com/help/ or e-mail:

Response:

Are you open about the dx to public, rl, people jt? Wow. I only talk about my others here on asd. I understand your disscomfort about being little around people. Luthe has a problem with me being out around people and I’m not a little. I think it’s pretty caring of you to watch for how you are being has an effect on others. I’d forgotten about the fact that not everybody here has others. Sorry about that anybody! n

generally quite willing to talk abt my "others", and am open abt the dx, etc. i’m not quite as comfortable being quite little around ppl. Generally, the rule is to pay attention to how ppl are reacting to me being obviously little (like tonight playing boardgames with friend – was Sunshine most of the night. Her voice is distinctive.), and if it seems like ppl are uncomfortable, we’ll switch out. with ppl who’ve never seen us little, it takes awhile before we’ll be quite little around them, and the kids are always a bit uncertain and shy, particularly, again, because the speaking voice is unmistakable. that’s about it, tho. it’s the kids’ choice whether they want to come out around someone. and if we’re talking about someone specific, but that part gets uncomfortable, we generally will stop talking bout them. my general thought, i guess, is that the more understandably weird i am to ppl, the less cr*zy i might seem. shrugs also, though i’m sure it’ll get mentioned, not everyone on this site is multiple, or has others. my pdoc doesn’t think i’m multiple. she just thinks i dissociate a lot. shrugs nice talking with you. jt — For more information about this posting service, contact: If you want an anonymous account, visit our sign-up page: https://asarian-host.net/cgi-bin/signup.cgi

Response:

food for thought…..yum! – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – am recognizing, for myself, that blue doesn’t really – or hasn’t really – think reality is "real". so he can comment on the rest of the system’s interaction with the "real" world that he thinks is real *for them*, but it doesn’t matter when the logic doesn’t work in return, because it’s not real *for him*. this prolly won’t help u much. jt jane, I know that fear of someone thinking I am lying or faking has be an enormous obstacle for me. My punishing one, CS, is the one who perpetuates the fear to keep us all silent. Reading here and allowing my insiders to write here and interact with others here has made them a little bolder. I don’t know how it works with you, but with me, it is an insider telling me that I am faking, and that other people will think so too. But, if I am lying or faking, as he says, then, who is he? The logic doesn’t quite work. dove I am afraid of my insiders. Just afraid. I don’t like to talk about them, even with the t. He says it is okay to talk but talking is bad, I think. I don’t want him to think that I am stupid and lying and faking and stuff. jane *strengthening and calming thoughts* jt in Hi, n, I don’t know if we’ve talked before. I know I started to respond to a wonderful post you wrote once about listening to Lorn**na McKenn*tt. I love her music. Anyway, let’s see if I can finish this response (I tend to start a lot of things and never finish them.) Yes, I seem to have rules about talking about the insiders. CS, a very cold, rational, and very punishing insider, does not allow talk about them, or their names to be mentioned. If he is influencing, or even "in charge", insiders and anything else related to dissociation is not to be discussed. Even saying "in charge" if offensive to him. He doesn’t approve of any talk that identifies us as someone dissociative. We have only mentioned the insiders by name here, and in a therapeutic setting. Even with T, however, it is really difficult to talk about the insiders, because CS becomes very ab*sive and controlling. It is even difficult to explain now, because he has had so much influence since a recent visit to FOO. Also, CS sometimes convinces me if is wrong to speak about the insiders, because my diagnosis is not DID, but complex PTSD, and DDNOS. To him (CS) this means that I should stop "acting" DID. Yet, there are these insiders, who can write, who can "whoosh" into this body and talk (has only happened with trusted T…..if they whoosh into body in front of anyone else, CS silences them….totally mute. Since I am generally quiet, it goes unnoticed). Anyway, I often feel like I am doing something wrong or forbidden if I talk about them, or let them talk, so yes, I guess I have rules about talking about them. Or maybe I should say CS has rules. And we have rules about who is allowed to know about them. Almost no one. Well, I am getting confused now, because, I am definitely breaking some rules here. dove I was reading a post today and thinking that the poster never, ever, talks about her "others". She always talks about dissociation, very eloquently, with detached rationality. I always, ALWAYS, talk about my others. Sometimes I get embarrased, or better said ashamed, because of this and don’t post alot and hide alot because I think talking about Luthe and the Leutenant is just a way to be full of myself and to hog or control the conversation and make it about me. (Sometimes I feel like that must be why I can’t sustain friendships because I am not a very good partner in a conversation) But then I think it’s just that’s how I talk about dissociation. And that alot of people here who never talk about thier others

– For info about this service, see http://anon.twwells.com/help/ or e-mail:

Response:

Hi n…….

Hi, Nahanton. How are you? It’s been a while since we’ve talked, I think. Yes, I think it -has- been a while.  It’s good to see you here.  I had s*rgery this summer which was potentially serious, and laid me up for about 3 weeks….but, it seems that I’m healing well, and the doctor thinks that I’m going to be alright. :O)  WHEW!! I seem to have acquired a whole set of rule regarding my insiders. It’s kind of complicated and doesn’t always work, but I guess they’re guidlines at best.

Yes, me too. Talk about Luthe but not about Another One Of Us. Don’t use names. Don’t criticize. Don’t correct. Don’t mention anyone in Luthe’s real life. etc. and etc. I guess though, like the Leutenant says if you want respect you have to respect. You "seem" to be more comfortable with the rules than I.  I go on automatic frequently, and when I realize I’ve been following a rule, I find it frustrating.  My t has suggested to me (and I think he’s on target) that many of my rules were for survival, and are antiquated and not needed now.  For me to implement them, doesn’t make sense in the here and now.  So, I’m working on cancelling out  "automatic response." <sigh I have written here about problems I’ve had with some of the "others." I know that one of them, (Feeler) has written into the ng on her own a few times in the past. My insiders are not "allowed" to come out to deal with happenings in rl.

"allowed"? Yes…..A very strong rule is that no one other than the ones I’ve mentioned are allowed to communicate……. except to the t.    In the past, when I’m in a very bad situation, or a dangerous one, Louise (the protector) emerges, and will handle stuff that’ s just unmanageable for me. She does this in a way that ppl do not know that it’s is a "different" Nahanton they’re dealing with. If I become overcome with fear, she’ll frequently "take over" and get me through it. Unfortunately, I almost never have memory of this, and only know of the outcome when friends or family inform me that I was "brave" or were surprised at how I handled the problem.

I’m glad she’s there for you like that. Me too!!!  My biggest wish, however, would be that I didn’t need her so much. I sooooo want to be able to handle "life" on my own. …She believes she’s an entirely seperate entity.

Does she beleive you exist then? It’s hard to know what she actually believes.  She’s told the t that "the rest of us are soiled, bad and dirty, and that she needs to "get rid of us" so that she can remain pristine."  I get the feeling that she perceives us to be akin to a roach or something like that. <snip  Consequently, . That makes asd and my t even more important. Without these things, I’d be terribly isolated and alone in this area of my life.

That’s exactly why asd is so important for me too. I don’t talk to *anybody* in real life. There’d be nobody to talk to if I wanted too unless you count paying a t to listen to me. Before asd I used to have to pretend too much. Pretend stories in my head. Pretend friends. Pretend homes. Pretend life. It was very unhealthy I think. So, you don’t see a t?  Have you ever?  (Pls don’t feel a need to answer if this is too personal.)  I did a lot of pretending when I was a child and in early adulthood.  It was comforting.  When I started to remember (about 10 years ago) what my "real" childhood was all about, the ability to pretend started to leave.  I missed it for a very long time. It’s funny Luthe thinks he is pretending on asd (if he thinks of it at all which is not very often (EXCEPT: his friends here on asd are real to him! How can they be real to him and I can’t be real? He thinks about you guys a lot. But I’m *not* real. ?!? This is wierd!) Anyway it’s funny that Luthe thinks asd is pretending for him and I know asd is real and my make believe friends and life that I thoughtabout before was pretending. I don’t think I quite understand this part.  I feel that I’m the real one.  I _want_ to think that the insiders are NOT.  This can cause problems.  Then, this real person (me) gets petrified about something, and calls on Louise to come and help.  <shrug Wierd. I think it would take a dissociative Freud to figure out the convolutions in this one. :O) Sorry to digress, Nahanton. I think you and I have a lot in common. Except I think I;m more comfortable with all of the people I have to share with. We have a lot of the same fears/frustrations about talking. Not at all.  I’ve enjoyed hearing your take on the "inner workings."  I think you’re right, in that you ARE more comfortable with the ppl you share with.  I sort of want to be, but want to be independent, yet want to share…….pick one or any of the three listed…they’re all true. :O) Nahanton

 

Response:

Of course not, dove.  I’m glad you wrote in.  I find it fascinating hearing about the sameness and/or differences.  I’m very glad tha n brought this topic up. Nahanton Yes, me too. Talk about Luthe but not about Another One Of Us. Don’t use names. Don’t criticize. Don’t correct. Don’t mention anyone in Luthe’s real life. etc. and etc. I guess though, like the Leutenant says if you want respect you have to respect.

Oh, yes, I almost forgot.  There seems to be a rule for us too, about using names.  Even in T, if I am talking about the littles, I refer to them as the vulnerable ones or just point to the left of me and say "them", and point to the right for CS.  And the RL name makes all the insiders cringe.  If an insider is using the body, they seem to be unable to utter their own name, if they do, or it they hear the RL name, CS slams in like he is breaking up some forbidden activity.  He seems to have a strong connection to the RL name, and the RL foo people, and is very repulsed by the use of the insiders’ names.  Even here, sometimes we are unable to sign a post using the name of the insider who is writing it. I think the Lieutenant is right about respect. CS could learn a lot from him. Hope you and Nahanton don’t mind that I isolated a paragraph from your conversation. dove  

Response:

Yes, me too. Talk about Luthe but not about Another One Of Us. Don’t use names. Don’t criticize. Don’t correct. Don’t mention anyone in Luthe’s real life. etc. and etc. I guess though, like the Leutenant says if you want respect you have to respect.

Oh, yes, I almost forgot.  There seems to be a rule for us too, about using names.  Even in T, if I am talking about the littles, I refer to them as the vulnerable ones or just point to the left of me and say "them", and point to the right for CS.  And the RL name makes all the insiders cringe.  If an insider is using the body, they seem to be unable to utter their own name, if they do, or it they hear the RL name, CS slams in like he is breaking up some forbidden activity.  He seems to have a strong connection to the RL name, and the RL foo people, and is very repulsed by the use of the insiders’ names.  Even here, sometimes we are unable to sign a post using the name of the insider who is writing it. I think the Lieutenant is right about respect. CS could learn a lot from him. Hope you and Nahanton don’t mind that I isolated a paragraph from your conversation. dove — For info about this service, see http://anon.twwells.com/help/ or e-mail:

Response:

Yes, I think it -has- been a while. It’s good to see you here. I had s* rgery this summer which was potentially serious, and laid me up for about 3 weeks….but, it seems that I’m healing well, and the doctor thinks that I’m going to be alright. :O) WHEW!!

I didn’t know about that, Nahanton. I’m sorry. That’s wonderful news that you’re going to be alright I seem to have acquired a whole set of rule regarding my insiders. It’s kind of complicated and doesn’t always work, but I guess they’re guidlines at best. Yes, me too. Talk about Luthe but not about Another One Of Us. Don’t use names. Don’t criticize. Don’t correct. Don’t mention anyone in Luthe’s real life. etc. and etc. I guess though, like the Leutenant says if you want respect you have to respect. You "seem" to be more comfortable with the rules than I. I go on automatic frequently, and when I realize I’ve been following a rule, I find it frustrating. My t has suggested to me (and I think he’s on target) that many of my rules were for survival, and are antiquated and not needed now. For me to implement them, doesn’t make sense in the here and now. So, I’m working on cancelling out "automatic response." <sigh

But, Nahanton, your rules are survival mechanisms that your others have asked for to keep you safe. Aren’t they? Then doesn’t make more sense to have your t convince your others to rescind them rather than convince you to ignore them? If Luthe had a stupid rule that we had to say sorry to every pole we run into I’d rather convince him that the poles liked the contact and get him comfortable with not saying sorry than to say I wasn’t going to say sorry just because it was me out and I thought it was a silly rule. -sotto voce- He actually *has* that rule, btw -sotto vocce- I have written here about problems I’ve had with some of the "others." I know that one of them, (Feeler) has written into the ng on her own a few times in the past. My insiders are not "allowed" to come out to deal with happenings in rl. "allowed"? Yes…..A very strong rule is that no one other than the ones I’ve mentioned are allowed to communicate……. except to the t.

Oh, I guess I understand that. I can’t *tell* anyone that I’m not Luthe. Which means I can’t tell anyone that I’m me. But I can talk to them. Just so as they think it’s Luthe. In the past, when I’m in a very bad situation, or a dangerous one, Louise (the protector) emerges, and will handle stuff that’ s just unmanageable for me. She does this in a way that ppl do not know that it’s is a "different" Nahanton they’re dealing with. If I become overcome with fear, she’ll frequently "take over" and get me through it. Unfortunately, I almost never have memory of this, and only know of the outcome when friends or family inform me that I was "brave" or were surprised at how I handled the problem. I’m glad she’s there for you like that. Me too!!! My biggest wish, however, would be that I didn’t need her so much. I sooooo want to be able to handle "life" on my own.

That I can understand too. I don’t want Luthe to go away. I just want us to be two different people. I’m sorry to hear that Louise doesn’t want you around. That’s sad. So, you don’t see a t?  Have you ever?  (Pls don’t feel a need to answer if this is too personal.)  I did a lot of pretending when I was a child and in early adulthood. It was comforting. When I started to remember (about 10 years ago) what my "real" childhood was all about, the ability to pretend started to leave. I missed it for a very long time.

We used to go. It didn’t work out. We couldn’t go now if we wanted to. And I don’t think I want to. Except I might ask Luthe to get one session with a t that is also a chr*st**n because I have some r*l*g**s question only a t could answer. But I would want him or her to help me with those questions of f*ith and not "fix" me psychologicaly. We’d all have died if we couldn’t have pretended. We protected that for ever. You say you missed it for a very long time. Is it back for you now? I *hope* so! I feel that I’m the real one. I want to think that the insiders are NOT. This can cause problems. Then, this real person (me) gets petrified about something, and calls on Louise to come and help. <shrug

Then she tries to convince that *you* aren’t real. But is that irony… or maybe something that you want too? That’s a real question, Nahanton, not rhetoric. I think Luthe is real. But I think I am real too. Not at all. I’ve enjoyed hearing your take on the "inner workings." I think you’re right, in that you ARE more comfortable with the ppl you share with. I sort of want to be, but want to be independent, yet want to share……. pick one or any of the three listed…they’re all true. :O)

I like Luthe and the Leutenant. I don’t even mind sharing a body with them ( even though it’s really wierd at times!) but I’d really, really like to be just me, just some of the time. It *is* nice discussing this with you, Nahanton. Night. n — For more information about this posting service, contact: If you want an anonymous account, visit our sign-up page: https://asarian-host.net/cgi-bin/signup.cgi

Response:

Hello all who are talking here – Oh, yes – all of us cringe from the name used for us when the body was at home in fmly; and most of us cringe from use of outside name (which is the full first name, not the smaller name used in the fmly growing up) from certain peoples, and others kind of feel false about any of us answering to it.  And the last name, which we did never change and not will change, it still does not feel right or it does not feel wrong, it just feels as if it is like part of us that does not be changed, even though it feels odd. Just goes w/this too-strange territory, yes? dove – I l*ve the way you have devised for referring to those whom you are not allowed to speak of in words.  That is so brilliant. Beauty. — To email me, remove "nospam" from my address. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Yes, me too. Talk about Luthe but not about Another One Of Us. Don’t use names. Don’t criticize. Don’t correct. Don’t mention anyone in Luthe’s real life. etc. and etc. I guess though, like the Leutenant says if you want respect you have to respect. Oh, yes, I almost forgot.  There seems to be a rule for us too, about using names.  Even in T, if I am talking about the littles, I refer to them as the vulnerable ones or just point to the left of me and say "them", and point to the right for CS.  And the RL name makes all the insiders cringe.  If an insider is using the body, they seem to be unable to utter their own name, if they do, or it they hear the RL name, CS slams in like he is breaking up some forbidden activity.  He seems to have a strong connection to the RL name, and the RL foo people, and is very repulsed by the use of the insiders’ names.  Even here, sometimes we are unable to sign a post using the name of the insider who is writing it. I think the Lieutenant is right about respect. CS could learn a lot from him. Hope you and Nahanton don’t mind that I isolated a paragraph from your conversation. dove — For info about this service, see http://anon.twwells.com/help/ or e-mail:

Response:

I wish there were more different words for the nuances of "pretending".

pong? is this my friend from years ago? When did you come back to asd, pong? hi!  :) n — For more information about this posting service, contact: If you want an anonymous account, visit our sign-up page: https://asarian-host.net/cgi-bin/signup.cgi

Response:

Related Posts