In the pinned message in #homotown for DID resources, the Carolyn Spring blog links should be replaced with sources like: https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/9792-dissociative-identity-disorder-multiple-personality-disorder
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/dissociative-disorders/symptoms-causes/syc-20355215
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK568768/
#DID Resources
1 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)
i second this motion
@light karma
Core theory is out dated though.
This explains the new theory https://dissociadid.carrd.co/#
@light karma
Also why weren't any systems involved in this decision??? (as far as i can tell)
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
I love it when singlets help spread misinformation!!!
idfk these things. I was given links from cleveland clinic and mayo clinic who are both pretty large research medical organizations. I just woke up so i didnt pay attention to who posted it; i mixed them up for someone else i guess
i'm not mad at you dw im just frustrated in general
how is that outdated
you're telling me that three massive medical organizations are spreading misinformation??
i hate to be that person but the link you posted doesn't have any sources, or if i missed them I'm really sorry, Dema Master
^ i can't find any sources on this carrd link at all
we should be using sources from medical organizations with professionals
@light karma
i mentioned the suggestion to a system last night and they seemed fine with it
also when i look up the username of the person that made the carrd there's no results
edit: nvm there is an account but it's private
it's fine if you don't like my sources because you think the theory is "outdated" but can you provide some sources from medical organizations instead of a carrd link
alright here i've found some information on the theory mentioned that isn't a carrd link, and the author seems to have credentials
even though i still believe this could be helpful in explaining DID to people who haven't heard of it before
Are you even a system?
[Reply to:](#1102147745273352272 message) even though i still believe this could be helpful in explaining DID to people who haven't heard of i…
i don't feel comfortable talking about my mental health conditions, thanks
Core theory is out dated and its a very well known fact in the DID community
this should be a better source then, correct?
it discusses the structural dissociation theory
Kye the problem isnt the material, it's the source
I just used the one that explained it the best way
my intention was to change the source to something more reputable
I had showed it to a friend before
as currently the source is not from a mental health professional/does not have any sources linked, and is instead offering courses
so i feel we should change the blog links to something different
that's why i made this suggestion and that's why i took places like cleveland/mayo/nih instead
if you have different sources that are reputable then feel free to drop them here
i found that one source and the author seems to have a background in trauma and dissociation, and has some papers linked/they are a doctoral student
I am gonna fucking lose my mind
I was just fucking using a link I already had ready for these situations
hey
Aleks
Is this argument over then?
[Reply to:](#1102147745273352272 message) looks like a good source
it wasn't an argument to begin with?
i thought we were just having a dialogue about the sources
chill brah
It felt like one
if this was an argument i didn't know it was
kye why does your pfp say one year
guys listen
again if anyone else has good sources about DID please post them
aleks i met someone on papers please with ur name
this is after all a thread open to discussion
One year since I found out I was a system and I'm somehow not dead yet.
[Reply to:](#1102147745273352272 message) kye why does your pfp say one year
a carrd isn’t necessarily used to give us information about DID
my name is common in russia
congrats! or im sorry! idk if you are happy or sad about this
anyway keep it on topic
if u were to give another source backed up by a group thats trusted within the area, it could be a better source
lets stay on topic
i arrested her she has a bomb on her back
i'm sure if multiple people come together we can find some other good sources
I was using it under the impression that they didn't know much
[Reply to:](#1102147745273352272 message) a carrd isn’t necessarily used to give us information about DID
ok sorry
what
I just wang to go to bed
it's only 2 a week?
i don't claim to be a professional on DID but it's not like i don't know anything lol
damn
4
but anyway
they gatekeeping reactions
like
but u cant rlly rebuke something with a carrd
i disagree, eistein shared the theory of relativity using carrd
idk its just.. not a good idea to put non peer reviewed shit as a be all end all explanation, peer reviewal is important to the scientific process and it prevents silly shit from happening
the initial source given was backed up and reviewed by others
nvm guys paris got this ill go to sleep 😴
gn yangel
gn yangel
yeah like if im asking for a source on something and one person gives me like 3 medical institutions research and information and the other person gives me a carrd and a tumblr blog.. im going with the medical professional
thats all from me kara out, peace 🫡
bye kara
I can't explain what I was thinking at the time but I don't think I was entirely there
did-research is a great source rather than the carrd, you could TOTALLY like make a carrd with information pulled from NIH.gov and did-research.org but it would have to be cited for it to be trustworthy
ykwim
if you guys don't like the original list much i feel that we should still keep the NIH one
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK568768/
as this one is pretty in depth
my main concern is just the perceived authenticity of whatever source
why
for sure
you're ok dw
there's one carrd in that list that's pinned that links sources
ive seen this øne before
at the end of the day, the actual site is more trustable, verifying if the carrd is trustable is just wasting more time that could be saved by just going to official sites
Nope, we are not antagonizing you. If you'd like to chat in private with one of us, say so
We just would like to help.
although i will say kye i do get and agree with what youre sayinbg about how the carrd is more accessable and understandable but i still dont think its the best look (that carrd specifically, not ANY carrd on DID) i just would feel more comfortable if sources were cited to enforce the reputation of it, ykwim?
We don't want to make you feel ganged up because of something that's meant to help you, but also help others understand this condition better
just to make sure we're on the same page i have no negative/ill intentions by the way
yeah honestly we didnt mean to gang up we all kinda stumbled upon this at similar times
gn Kye
ok gn
can we atleast not use cleveland? mayo clinic is fine.
does mayo clinic serve mayo?
whats wrong with Cleveland? /g
Core theory is out dated, there was never an "original" https://did-research.org/origin/structural_dissociation/
[Reply to:](#1102147745273352272 message) whats wrong with Cleveland? /g
putting cleveland would lead to more confusion later on and people asking who the "original" is when there isn't one.
yeah people think there is like a 'main' person but all the alters make up the 'main' person, correct me if im wrong I'm still learning and it's hard to wrap my head around it
Theres not really a main person, theres just the host who is the alter who fronts the most but any alter including introjects can be a host and hosts can change throughout a persons life.
oh i didnt know the host could change
There can also be co-hosts aswell and those can change.
pretty interesting stuff
Which is why we shouldn’t use cleveland clinic as a source for the pinned messages because it spreads misinformation.
do you have any sources saying that its outdated? because from what i can tell they pretty much uses "core" in the same way youre using "host"
yes hosts can change but that means they would be the "core personality" or whatever, wouldnt it?
plus cleveland never said anything about an "original" anywhere, so idk where thats coming from
^ what the other person said above
but just to add
LEVEL UP: You are now level 8!
we don’t have to use cleveland if it’s truly outdated, let’s just decide on some trustworthy sources
if you have any that you think would be good feel free to put them here
mayo is about as reputable as cleveland
so if you’re cool with mayo i’m cool with mayo and i’m sure the rest of the staff will be, although I can’t speak for everyone
No because cores don't change
It's supposed to be the word for the original person before the trauma
There is also this source about structural dissociation but I cannot find the full thing https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2008-03212-016
I believe this is it. https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/BF03379560.pdf
it states that did is when the personality is not able to fully form due to trauma
there can't be a core if the personality didn't fracture to begin with, it came already separated and refused to fuse together due to trauma
i understand how fragmentation works, nobody is implying that though, im just saying the article only uses the term “core” once and its in the same context that you would use for “host”, i see them used interchangeably all the time
its not really interchangeable though. example: butters right now is fronting the most and you wouldn't call him a core because he doesn't fit the definition
nowhere is it “promoting core theory”, its just using a basic term to explain the general concept of certain alters being the “main” or “most active” or whatever
i just don't want new people to get the wrong idea
i doubt anyone is going to look at an article that has the word “core” in it once and doesnt mention “originals” anywhere and ask about it
why do singlets get to choose what information people will get when people ask why theres a bot in the chat? (please don't be mean in your reply i just wanna know) /genq
ive done my own extensive research on this stuff, and ive had several systems explain the same idea that the term core is interchangeable for the host or most prominent identity within a system, and because most people in this server are "singlets", and from an outside perspective a lot of the terms and stuff used by systems dont make a whole lot of sense, not to mention they arent like medically recognized or anything. I'm not saying theyre wrong per se, medical research can be like a few years behind or whatever, but its a better idea imo to have resources like NIH and Cleveland and Mayo explaining it in terms that anyone can understand. If someone asks about your "core", which i doubt would happen anyway, you could just say "we dont have a core, but x is the host" or whatever idk
i'm tired and stressed and sad so im giving up on doing anything about this you can move on
at this rate i couldnt care less about cleveland clinic
@dull jungle hello
i'd like to help clear up this debate
https://did-research.org/origin/structural_dissociation/ do you confirm the contents of this source align with your experience?
yes
[Reply to:](#1102147745273352272 message) https://did-research.org/origin/structural_dissociation/ do you confirm the contents of this source … 📎
great, we'll replace the cleveland clinic one
as for my understanding of the topic the expression "usual personality" does not cover a wide variety of DID experiences
yes
We should also acknowledge OSDD systems too
fair point. the new pinned message i sent with sacarver acknowledges pk is for both DID/OSDD systems, and the did-research website also covers OSDD in its pages
Oh sorry, I didnt see
[Reply to:](#1102147745273352272 message) fair point. the new pinned message i sent with sacarver acknowledges pk is for both DID/OSDD systems…