Contact: Email Us!


FAQ
Thoughts and Essays
Extended Statement of Being
In Essence
Information on How We Work
Links

The spectrum of plurality
It's hard to know where the line falls between singlet and median, and between median and full multiple (term 'multiple' used from now on to avoid confusion, with plural as a blanket term for the spectrum). Clearly there doesn't need to be a line, or, there shouldn't, but it's never quite that simple, and how does one label oneselves within plural groups.
One example is the Annat group, which has two members, A and S. A is the person most people see as the fronter, with S taking front in situations of extreme stress, when A cannot. The rest of the time, they are pretty much blended into one, with occasional spurts of an idea from S (the lead in the blend appears to be A). How would this be labelled? The two of them don't get memory gaps, although they do get 'fogginess', and there is a distinct sense of different typing. This was picked up on primarily as their partners are both varying levels of plural, and spotted a distinct difference in typing and attitudes. This seems relatively median, yet a lot of the time they interact as a singlet, whilst co-fronting.
For us, we have always considered ourselves to be a full species of plural, but this has fallen into question recently. We interact in our own "world", and that has one point of access to the front. When a group of singlets meet up, they can speak in a language, and understand each other, but there is no sharing of thoughts. It is like that on the inside, we can communicate vocally, using subtext and body language.
Does this make us multiple, or median, or somewhere in between? Some say that to be fully multiple you should be unable to communicate without using paper in the Earth world, others don't.
It means a lot to me, at least, to be a 'full' multiple, just as it does for someone to come and visit our group (if such a thing is possible). It would feel like a validation, like our experiences were real, and valid, and we are people, because in this world where there are so few rights for multiples, it can be invalidating.
But I digress.
What is a singlet anyway?
I describe myself as a singlet in a multiple system, because, well, I /am/.
I don't have anyone sharing my head, I share a head with a group of people, sure, but I have my own private head.
I don't hear voices (or, y'know, that's another story, and one that won't be told here)
Multiplicity is difficult, the spectrum confusing, we need to take care that everyone is validated, or nobody will be
© 2008 - Pagmies Collective You are free to use and edit the text from this site, but we must be linked to