advanced search/how to search
Print New | edit Group SideBar New | Logout New
Thank you for your perspective : )
We are going to respectfully disagree. Id/Ego/SuperEgo are not just "Roles" that singlets play out. Roles do not have arguments with each other and undermine one another. We are multiple AND we have roles. Who fulfills our roles changes from time-to-time and some of us have "favorite roles" and the male-identified in our system played our "Mother" role to our children as-needed. The current more-evolved incarnation of Freud & Jung's earlier works on the internal conflicts many troubled people have can be seen in Internal Family Systems Theory & the therapy models based on it. This page was written a long long time ago (probably like 17-18 years?) before I owned the book by Schwartz, but I do think there are people with stronger delineations than a "mere Singlet" who is really just a singlet, and those with more differentiation.
When singlets talk about their "inner child" I don't think they're always just making stuff up any more than when people with DID talk about littles. Whether they're simply not (yet!) diagnosed with any dissociative disorders, or they have a hurt child "part" as in soul loss or even just non-complex PTSD that needs comforting and nurturing but will never be sufficient cause to get them a diagnosis as DID or OSDD in a therapeutic situation.
I think that there's no such thing as black & white in the world. Just like there's a continuum of sexual attraction, gender, etc. there is a continuum of "multiplicity" where people are so close to really truly just one person and cannot even shift so much as to differentiate for appropriate behavior in different settings all the way through strongly delineated group entities/multiples who are completely walled off from each other to the point that they don't even know or believe (if told) that each other exists.
Most people are between the extremes somewhere in the beautiful multi-varied shades of grey in the wide-between. And I think that there are sayings in our language that come from that truth. A person who is not multiple in the sense that we mean on this site will still occasionally have the "I'm of two minds on this issue...." problem, and it really is that they have 2 different views/opinions/perspectives/philosophies/desires/beliefs/etc. — a good chunk of what gives a clear sense that one person is not someone else.
I actually recently explained to a bunch of singlets a couple of truths they probably experience that — ratcheted up — would start to look an awful lot like they were multiple. Freaked a couple people out because they caught a little glimpse of where they sat in that wide grey area. I think the basic example was highway hypnosis — if they can "lose time" while driving and go off in a reverie — then who's driving?
It was a longer walk-through example than that. But it got the point across and made a bunch of singlets understand we're not talking about ROLES here — and they shoudn't doubt that this is a real experience.
Hope we can agree to disagree,