• 💖 [Donate To Keep MyPTSD Online] 💖 Every contribution, no matter how small, fuels our mission and helps us continue to provide peer-to-peer services. Your generosity keeps us independent and available freely to the world. MyPTSD closes if we can't reach our annual goal.

Structural dissociation and gender

Status
Not open for further replies.
DID is a form of Structural Dissociation, and none of us should be trying to adjust reality to fit a theory about reality.
I think DID is a disorder, and Structural Dissociation is a theory. Considering DID as a form of structural dissociation is mixing apples and oranges (no pun intended).

The OP is convinced that they don't have DID. That's nice. They're also at risk of denying their experience because 'If it only happens in DID, it can't be happening'
I don't believe that's what the OP said. And I certainly didn't say that either.

It's not helpful to conflate diagnoses. The symptom - experiencing a 'part' of yourself as a different gender than your biological bits - is possible under many circumstances, and does not point to DID specifically. OP identifies with structural dissociation. None of us should be here to tell her she's got DID instead....and nowhere did the OP say that "it can't be happening".

You're projecting.
 
They're also at risk of denying their experience because 'If it only happens in DID, it can't be happening'.

I appreciate that reminder. I used to be convinced I didn't have PTSD, so I do need to be open and validating to my own experiences.

I think DID is a disorder, and Structural Dissociation is a theory. Considering DID as a form of st...

I appreciate your thoughts here. I don't know exactly whats going on with me, but its good to realize there are many different circumstances that could be contributing to my experience. Don't worry I'm not going to be convinced I have a diagnosis solely based on a message board, I'll leave that up to a trained professional.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Even those who have no mental health issues can identify that they have what they'd call masculine and feminine aspects of the self. So, it stands to reason that inside of Structural Dissociation theory, one might be aware of more masculine or feminine aspects - i.e. 'parts' - irregardless of biological gender.

This. Def this.

I don't have DID but I do have "parts" that I have no name for. They feel alter-like but none take over control which is required for DID so I don't have DID. Its rather complicated, to me anyway. I have a "part" that feels very male.

Actually, being a therory, I couldn't be diagnosed with Structural Dissociation but reading this: Phase-oriented treatment of structural dissociation in complex traumatization: overcoming trauma-related phobias. - PubMed - NCBI sounds both, just like how it feels to me and the phases this lists is the exact thing my therapist is doing, in the order he is doing them. Take that for what that's worth though.

I am very tom boy-ish anyway, which is what I took out of the quoted statement by JL. That we all have female & male characteristics. And me loving, already, more "male stuff" it is often hard to tell but sometimes when I can feel this part of me more, I will seek out way more male-like things then normal. And a few times I have pondered if I was transgender. That ponder didn't last long but sometimes that how clear I can feel that male "part".

So, yes, it is super possible without having DID.

ETA: I just realized that link was only about phobias (though he said so early in....doh) but it was the first link that I clicked on the learn what Structural Dissociation was. It gives you the general idea.
 
Considering DID as a form of structural dissociation is mixing apples and oranges (no pun intended).

You've just contradicted the Structural Dissociation textbook. Please refer to The Haunted Self, table 1.1

The Haunted Self, table 1.1 (fair use for educational purposes, less than a chapter of a longer work)

Diagnoses and Structural Dissociation

Primary Structural Dissociation
One predominant ANP and one EP; the latter is often not very elaborated or autonomous
Simple types of Acute Stress Disorder
Simple types of PTSD
Simple types of DSM-IV Dissociative Disorder
Simple types of ICD-10 Dissociative Disorders of Movement and Sensation

Secondary Structural Dissociation
One predominant ANP and more than one EP; the latter can be more elaborated and autonomous than in Primary Structural Dissociation, but is typically less elaborated and autonomous than in Tertiary Structural Dissociation
Complex PTSD
Disorders of Extreme Stress Not Otherwise Specified (DESNOS)
Dissociative Disorder Not Otherwise Specified
Trauma-related Borderline Personality Disorder
Complex ICD-10 Dissociative Disorders of Movement and Sensation

Tertiary Structural Dissociation
More than one ANP, and more than one EP; often several ANPs and EPs are more elaborated and autonomous (including the use of different names and physical features) than in SSD
Dissociative Identity Disorder
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You've just contradicted the Structural Dissociation textbook. Please refer to The Haunted Self, table 1.1
I understand; but Structural Dissociation is not at all related to a DSM or ICD diagnosis. That except shows how structural dissociation views itself, when superimposed over the known diagnoses.

Structural dissociation = a detailed theory of dissociation.
DID = a diagnosable disorder.

I'm not sure how to be clearer...and I'm not trying to actually debate anything. Structural dissociation is a concept of organization and understanding - a way to be more precise about what is happening during dissociation.

A diagnosis, such as DID or PTSD or soon to be CPTSD, etc., is a label given to certain specific sets of symptoms and experiences.
 
I think we're having this conversation because we value clarity and precision. It also relates to the question of whether DID belongs in the category of 'things that have nothing to do with PTSD'.

SD is a detailed theory of dissociative disorders, that makes predictions about treatment for those disorders. It asserts that if a person has a level of dissociation that impacts the structure of their personality, that certain common features and treatment responses can be expected.

SD makes assertions about ICD/DSM diagnoses: specifically, that the diagnoses listed in table 1.1 have something in common. The thing that they have in common is that they are 'disorders of Structural Dissociation'.

There's no denying that the DSM is a tangled mess, and ICD a slightly less tangled mess. SD theory offers a pathway towards untangling that mess, and an opportunity to understand the pathology that underlies the conditions in table 1.1.

And the predictions regarding efficacious treatment are important too: if the difference between DID and PTSD is a difference of degree (and not a difference of nature) then what helps one is likely to help the other.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top