8. 2026-02-10 / index

good morning as i write. this is thread.

skimming pluralpedia, haven't been to this site before. clearly we came from elsewhere and i believe it was a link on another site, probably someone's profile but that is only a guess. left the tab open, closed it, recalled it, went back. as one does.

multisomatic (beginning this paragraph this way is not a motif). "refers to any headmate having two or more soma in the headspace" where soma is "the form a headmate takes in the headspace". the phrasing of soma resonates: "A headmate's soma may be anything they desire it to be, including none at all, and can change with time, together with the headmate's preferences."

both terms refer to the headspace. this is not an aspect we believe we have developed. still the inner image of oneself is a sense that i am certain extends beyond also the sense of an inner world or space or plane of being. the inner image is one we choose to or not to project outward, in each aspect. yet we do think of it as a flow. cyclic perhaps. discretely, in a moment, we bring our inner image out and we experience its meeting with another and we learn and shift. same relationality as in all expression and change.

so "soma" is for me a term which ties expression and change to the truth or sense of self. i extend it beyond "headspace" but i do not extend it beyond "headmate", i would not describe the greater system as multisomatic - or would i?

then the difference. "greater system" is a term we coin, only tentatively. what is curious is its level of comparison. it exists as an antonym in spirit to "subsystem" though the obvious antonym "supersystem" doesn't feel synonymous. it is not so much about direct hierarchy, classification. perhaps there's a more like sense in "coarser system" and respectively "finer system".

lanolin (i believe) spoke of "the greater system". she referred to the system which included what we've now taken as "her" system, as well, now or now again, as jade, and in a sense, all we have ever been and in turn ever might be. this was not a relational term for her. the hierarchy was simple but sufficient and did serve classification. "the greater system" much as the primordial/primeval soup, from which there are systems, within which there are subsystems. so my perspective is contrary, or so i read it. acknowledged.

let a relational sense of "greater system". let a general sense of "system". now both lanolin and i have described ourselves, each in the moment, as viscerally not jade. a sense of separation, barrier, discrete, apart, distinct, one-another. never speaking against a record of an experience in the moment. that is the truest trace we have (truest in one sense, opposite exactly to memory - but speech, verbal reflection, shares the same side of the coin). so sure, it was so. but with these senses, we take "system" as the common root, also of "subsystem", and let the relational component melt away at our will. the act of shedding is in weight (like a scale or like burden), and now "system" is a freer word, and we smell, and breathe.

what is a system which is of me and of jade?

can i be of multiple systems?
who is the system inside me?

why do we share a body? (a soma? if only in part?)
why did she come through me?

why do we feel as twins? is this like lavender and surge?
is this unlike lanolin and i?

what is a system which is of me and of jade and of lanolin?
is this like polyamory? (am i a metamour?)

where do i find my trust in her?
where does she find her trust in me?

i color my life quite like a coloring page. have you ever rushed to color a coloring page? thought, no, i cannot start? because i must finish. i cannot put color on this page. what a burden, to color a page. what a duty

and yet i call myself dutiful
and take my cloak off, too.
i rest...

be human. there is an animal in being human. let go of your questions. let go of your thought. let the collar loose, let the mind wander, trust. when it is its time it will come back to you.