i (and i guess like. 99% of specialists lol) like to frame these parts not as “bad” but as misguided protectors. they might embody the voice of an abuser or harmful figure because they’re trying to keep the system "safe" in some way, even if it doesn’t feel like it. in your case, this introject might:

• be trying to keep control over emotions or behaviors the system finds threatening.
• represent internalized harm or fear, channeling it outward to "protect" the system from vulnerability.
• reflect a part of you that’s terrified of being harmed again and thinks adopting the aggressor's role is the best way to avoid being a victim.

the key is to work with this introject not as an enemy, but as someone who’s stuck in their role and needs a new job.

janina emphasizes compassion without compliance. you don’t have to agree with or validate the introject’s beliefs, but you can approach him with curiosity and respect to help him evolve. here’s how that could start:

1. acknowledge his existence: instead of outright rejecting him, let him know you see and hear him. something like:

"i know you’re here, and i understand you feel strongly about what you believe. but we need to figure out why you’re holding onto these things. if we figure out why and how, you can be able to do what you need to do, without me or others trying to stop you."

this sets the stage for a dialogue, not a battle.

1. explore his purpose: persecutory parts usually have a job they think they’re doing for the system, even if it’s harmful. you can/should ask him questions like: what are you trying to protect us from? what do you think would happen if you weren’t here? how did you come to believe what you believe?

this helps shift the focus from his beliefs to his role. understanding doesn’t mean excusing. it just gives you tools to work with him.

*this shouldn't/doesn't have to be done all in one go. you wouldn't expect to do the same in therapy, so why would you expect to do it out of therapy either?

1. validate his emotions, not his actions: if he’s holding anger, fear, or pain, acknowledge it: "i get that you’re angry and scared. those feelings are valid. but the way you’re expressing them isn't very efficient. there's probably better ways to to express what you need to, without hurting me and the system. i want to work with you to figure out what those are."

this approach helps him feel seen without reinforcing harmful behaviors or ideologies.

on the note of not wanting him using the source's name or holding onto those harmful beliefs. here’s how you might navigate THAT:

1. you can address the name issue firmly: explain that the name is too triggering and harmful to the system and isn’t something you’re willing to allow. frame it as a boundary. “you’re part of the system, but that name represents harm and violence. we can’t use it because it’s not safe for me or the system as a whole.” the thing that makes this a boundary is that you and the rest of your system just simply will not use that name to refer to him.

you could offer a neutral or random name instead. it can be temporary if that helps. you can also offer him the option in way that works with most people (and children): "I'm going to refer to you differently, but I want you to be involved with that process. do you want to help suggest names, or do you want me to come up with something for you?" - if he isn't cooperative, then you can move to "okay, well we can call you xyz for now. let me know if you want something different."

then, after all of this, in bits and pieces you can attempt reeducation, if he’s open to it.

if he’s at all willing to listen, you can start challenging those beliefs gently:

- explain how his ideology actively harms you (and others in the system, if applicable).
- share your values and why those beliefs don’t align with safety or healing.
- frame this as a way for him to "grow" or adapt in the system, which can sometimes appeal to introjects who see themselves as powerful or important. if you need to, you can also frame this as "you say you're superior, but we have all these other alters who are able to front and do a lot more things in the system. wouldn't it be better for you to act in ways that don't position you under them?"

as for managing immediate harm...
if/when he’s outright harmful to you or the system, you don’t have to engage with him all the time. you can protect yourself by
- setting strict boundaries internally. if other parts can, you can ask them to help regulate when and how he shows up.
- creating internal safe spaces: this includes for him as well. he probably desires autonomy, and working on visualizing a space for him that works for him and gives him that will probably be appreciated.

the ultimate aim isn’t necessarily to "get rid" of him - it’s to help him let go of the harmful identity and beliefs so he can exist in a way that doesn’t hurt you or the system. introjects have the capacity to change, even if it’s slow and messy.

is not telling someone you have, say, irritable bowel syndrome a "secret"? probably not. same with, like, not broadcasting every detail of your trauma. these are deeply personal things, and not sharing them doesn’t mean you’re being deceptive. it’s about having boundaries and knowing who deserves that level of vulnerability.

there’s this cultural pressure, especially online, to be your "whole" self in a public way to justify how you exist. but honestly? you’re allowed to have private parts of your life that only come up when you feel safe. systems are complex, and having dissociation, rare switching, or even being unsure about all this doesn’t invalidate your experience. janina’s book on fragmented selves talks about how systems often emerge from trauma adaptations in ways that attempt to create safety​. the way your system interacts with fronting, distress, and switching sounds like it fits within that spectrum, even if it feels different from some of the stories you see online.

as for your partner - you’re not lying to them by not sharing everything right away. relationships thrive on mutual care, not on over-disclosure.

finally, just a little perspective: you’re not obligated to share until you feel it aligns with your needs, not just your values about honesty.

I'm going to recommend some books that I strongly recommend you read, even if a little bit at a time. you can use these books to educate yourself on some of the things that you would learn in therapy and will go a very long way in understanding and recovering alongside your system. the links I am giving you are to free online versions. if you do nothing else, please consider exploring those two resources so you've got a good baseline of dissociation and how to help yourself deal with these things. you do not have to exist eternally in a state of confusion or not understanding how to approach things - you deserve autonomy to improve your life and the information needed to make that autonomy a reality.

Healing The Fragmented Selves of Trauma Survivors is incredibly useful. if you read nothing else I ask you to read that. it's like a guidebook for anyone who’s ever felt like their trauma has split them apart inside. I really like the compassionate, science-backed approach to understanding how trauma and dissociation impact us on a neurological and emotional level - it's not too clinical - enough authority and confidence to help you trust what's being said, and enough care to know it's coming from a good place. what makes this book so compelling is that it doesn’t just explain the "why"—it gives practical tools for working with those fragmented parts of ourselves.

coping with trauma-related dissociation is also really good for anyone navigating the complexities of dissociation. it’s designed to be super practical - like a skills manual to help build stability and understanding within someone who experiences dissociation. the book is primarily tailored for complex trauma survivors, especially those with DID or related dissociative disorders, but I like that it's not 100% exclusive to DID

asking, 'do you usually vaguepost?' comes off as pretty passive-aggressive, and i don’t really accept that as a valid form of communication. if i’m misinterpreting your intent, i’m absolutely open to you clarifying!

that said, i want to address this directly: if you’re open to the possibility that my behavior/motivations might be different from what you’re ascribing to me (which seems to be that I am intentionally being rude and hurtful) i’d be happy to have a conversation about this. but framing your question in a way that assumes the only explanation is that i’m 'doing a bad thing'—like vagueposting feels unfair and makes it hard for me to engage meaningfully.

i’m not a Question Answering Machine, and i think it’s okay for me to express my thoughts and feelings about the questions i get. sometimes, commenting on the nature of a question itself can actually be helpful - it’s a way to encourage reflection or even more specific follow-ups from the asker. i try to approach that respectfully as I can, and not hatefully when it's not warranted.

when questions come from anonymous sources, discussing them publicly is often the best way to engage with them. it lets everyone, including the asker, reflect on how they frame their questions and see my thought process. i know the asker might see my response, so it doesn't make much sense to me to be openly hostile towards someone who's trying to figure something out.

for me personally the framing via which I understand parts/alters becoming more like 'introjects' over time is just, like. kinning. i already have a framework of how and why it happens that seems to have deviated from how people understand kinning these days but about 6 years ago what you're describing would mostly just be immediately understood as that's what's going on.

identity wise it makes sense. if you have a weak sense of identity sometimes a substitute one will do, especially if you can lean on it without having to use mental energy you might not have currently. it's also possible that they're just not very elaborated and need some kind of rebuilt identity to 'fill in the cracks' so they can more easily advocate for their feelings/needs and be heard, especially if you are more likely to be able to 'hear' or 'spot' them if you've trained yourself to look for fictives. this isn't saying this is a conscious choice, just to be clear. this is more so just what I feel is an unconscious behavior that happens in the background without anyone's intentional decisions.

tldr: if you don't have the outline of a personality, storebought is fine

i am so sorry this is so long

first - the thing about whether you need to process your trauma is that it's not mandatory in the sense that no one's gonna force you to do it.

second - if you know you’ve got trauma in your past, it doesn’t mean you have to grab a metaphorical shovel and go hunting for every buried memory. honestly, that can even be counterproductive for... most people. you should not do that outside of therapy, and even then, your therapist should/will help you with building coping mechanisms and ways to avoid total and complete flooding. healing doesn’t require digging stuff up just for the sake of it.

instead, you can/should ideally take it piece by piece as it naturally comes up in your life, as you are able to handle it.

a lot of people think trauma work means you have to have a crystal-clear memory of what happened to process it. that’s just not true, or possible, especially with complex trauma. sometimes, you don’t even have the full story—just fragments or the lingering effects it’s left behind. you don’t have to have a detailed narrative to heal. it’s less about the “what” and more about addressing the felt sense and how it shaped you. how it impacts your sense of safety, your relationships, and your reactions in the present. a lot of people think therapy or healing means basically just rehashing everything that happened, telling someone all the horrible details, and then somehow just getting over it—but that’s not true.

instead of actively digging for trauma however or completely Ignoring It though, you can just... address it when it surfaces naturally. maybe something triggers a big reaction, or you notice a pattern in how you respond to conflict, stress, or relationships. that is where the work can begin—not by dragging everything out all at once, but by focusing on what’s showing up in the here and now. healing is more often about learning to navigate those moments than about rehashing the past.

also - for a lot of people, dissociation is still a helpful tool - it’s probably a part of what got you through in the first place! you don’t need to “fix” dissociation to start healing. instead, think of it as something you can learn to work with. maybe it’s about managing it so you can stay grounded enough to handle daily challenges. or maybe it’s about figuring out when it’s protecting you versus when it might be keeping you stuck. either way, dissociation doesn’t have to go away completely for you to make progress.

even though you don’t have to go digging, there are good reasons to engage with your trauma as it arises, as you can, as well as building tools for recognizing when this stuff is coming up. for one, the coping mechanisms that got you through—like dissociation or avoidance—can sometimes start to spill over into the present in unhelpful ways. maybe you find yourself overreacting to conflict or feeling unsafe in situations where there’s no real danger. processing those moments can help you shift from surviving to thriving, making space for joy, connection, and safety that might feel out of reach right now.

tldr: you don’t HAVE to go hunting for your trauma or relive every painful memory to heal. you can and should take it as it comes, work with what shows up, and focus on building safety and connection in your life now. healing isn’t about “fixing” yourself or getting thru Every Single Bad Thing—it’s about helping yourself carry the weight of the past, recognizing when it's weighing on you, and then readjusting one small piece at a time.

in addition, if it helps, a way i think about unprocessed trauma is like files your brain that haven’t been able to store or integrate properly. when trauma isn’t processed, those “files” don’t get neatly put away in your brain’s filing system. instead, they float around, disconnected from the present and the past, and they can’t really slot themselves into your life in a way that helps you recognize patterns or respond appropriately.

dissociation acts like a barrier, protecting you from those “floating” files. it keeps them from overwhelming you, but it also means they stay unfiled, unorganized, and stuck in this kind of “repeating” state. that’s why unprocessed trauma can keep showing up—suddenly and unpredictably—even when you think you’ve moved past it.

processing isn’t about deleting or erasing those files, though. it’s about helping them find the right spot. it’s like saying to your brain, “okay, this belongs here. this is the context. this isn’t happening now.” that allows the memory or feeling to settle, to become a part of your story without overwhelming you. when those pieces are filed properly, they’re not trapped in a loop anymore, and they can show up when they’re actually needed—like when you want to reflect on something, recognize a pattern, or learn from an experience.

(also as a side note you should probably be more validating towards these unprocessed parts/feelings and not just end it with "that's not happening now," and validate the feelings that come up - that is a HUGE part of it. i am just trying to describe what processing does, and not necessarily "this is what you should say to parts/trauma")

while it can show up in those with complex dissociative disorders, it’s not exclusive to them. this often stems from growing up in environments where caregivers reacted unpredictably—overreacting or underreacting—and punishing children for responding emotionally.

when you grow up constantly adjusting to someone else's emotional extremes, you lose your own internal compass for gauging reactions. trauma survivors often develop a sense of "self-alienation," where their natural instincts and responses feel disconnected. pete walker in Complex PTSD: From Surviving to Thriving describes this as a symptom of emotional flashbacks from cptsd, where current emotions and reactions are tangled up with unresolved childhood trauma.

boon and colleagues in Coping with Trauma-Related Dissociation emphasize the importance of learning to reflect on your emotions and experiences as part of the healing process, and this helps you to rebuild that lost internal gauge. over time, therapy and grounding techniques can help you relearn how to navigate your responses in a way that feels authentic, balanced, and something you can trust instead of second guessing.

so yeah, it’s a trauma-related issue that can be amplified in complex dissociative experiences, but in general it's tied to unpredictable and unsafe environments many survivors grow up in

the idea that there’s a strict difference between “trauma holder” and “trauma coper” reflects a misunderstanding of how and why dissociative barriers form in DID. honestly, the concept of a “trauma coper” isn’t something you’ll find in DID literature; it’s not a term that captures the complexity of DID systems or how parts work. all alters, by their nature, play a role in coping with trauma, whether that coping is adaptive, maladaptive, or something in between.

the process of containing trauma memories within specific parts is itself a form of coping—it's the foundation of how DID develops as a survival strategy in childhood. this isn’t about clear-cut “holders” versus “copers” but rather about how different parts contribute to surviving overwhelming experiences in ways that are necessary for the person to function. every part plays a role, and those roles are fluid and can change over time as parts work together or come to share memories and responsibilities. if you share trauma memories with another part, they do not also become a trauma 'holder.'

while it IS true that DID systems often develop in a way that makes them appear “covert,” I don't think it's accurate to say that the disorder is “meant” to be covert. alters don’t exist solely to hide trauma any more than your bed exists solely to hide clutter underneath it. it’s more like how your brain doesn’t “hide” your nose—it just tunes it out because noticing it constantly would be distracting. in a similar way, the system creates a sense of separation from trauma to allow day-to-day functioning, but this isn’t the primary “purpose” of parts. dissociation creates barriers because the trauma was incompatible with the person’s sense of self and survival needs, not because parts are designed to hide things.

you see this kind of dissociation in PTSD too, where a person might fragment off certain memories or feelings, not because they’re “hiding” them, but because they can’t function while holding both the traumatized self and the self they need to be in daily life. like, you can’t fully embody the version of yourself that’s been in a traumatic event and still manage a professional workday simultaneously. so, alters in DID do what’s needed for survival and day-to-day life, which may involve dissociating trauma, but their purpose goes beyond just simply concealing experiences.

sorry that it came off as denying the existence of those things, I was more so criticizing the progression of the community into more and more advancedester versions of DID without any knowledge or recognition that yes, even just 'regular' DID is incredibly complex and that it does some people more harm than good to be convinced that they truly are so unique and alone in their trauma that the already existing terms could not possibly be something that could describe their experiences

as for the 'approving of endogenic systems I'm not really sure where you get that from. I'm pretty explicit about my distaste for syscourse and that i ultimately do not care about nor am I interested in debating the existence or lack thereof of an experience that I just... don't care about. it's not my business. its the same kind of feeling I assume someone would get if their special interest was trains and you asked me for my opinions on bikes. like I don't care about that. if someone says they don't experience trauma related dissociation it's not within my purview of knowledge and I don't have anything to offer on that front