Using OPs Tags - Tumblr Posts

Mid-continuum VS. Median

Disclaimer: This is a post covering a deep dive of archived events that took place in the past. DO NOT harass or send hate towards anyone mentioned.

Introduction

Mid-continuum was an early label created on the Internet sometime in 1996 by a plural named Vickis. Many individuals, both dissociative and non-dissociative, felt drawn to this term and it became quite popular. Unfortunately, it also ended up grabbing the attention of the anti-DID/OSDD movement. Later in the 2000′s, an anti-DID/OSDD organization coined the term median to replace mid-continuum. Median became more popularized, and mid-continuum subsequently fell out of usage. This post will be going over what I discovered while deep diving Internet archives regarding this subject.

The Precursor to Mid-continuum

In 1997 and earlier, many of the DID-focused websites at the time, such as Astraea’s Web, were spreading around a psychological model known as the dissociative spectrum (or continuum). This older model was conceptualized by Braun in 1988. His model suggested that dissociation lay on a continuum from normal experiences (daydreaming, zoning out, etc.) all the way to polyfragmented DID.

Archive of article by Joan A. Turkus, M.D. (1997)

Proof that this article was shared on Astraea’s Web.

Note for readers: Sources on this post do not reflect up-to-date research and treatment on dissociative disorders.

What was the Mid-continuum?

1. It was based off of the psychological model.

At the time, many individuals in the dissociative community felt drawn to Braun’s dissociative continuum model. One individual in particular, named Vickis, came up with a term for people who identified somewhere in the middle of this continuum. They called it mid-continuum dissociation or just mid-continuum for short. They called those who identified under the label mid-continuum dissociatives. Vickis eventually created a webpage dedicated to this concept called the Wonderful World of the MidContinuum.

2. It was created for dissociative folks.

It was sometime in 1997 when Vickis announced their new webpage to alt.support.dissociation, a Usenet group that was created for people with dissociative disorders. In their message, they stated that mid-continuum folks were dissociative folks who did not fit all of the DID criteria. 

You can find an archive of this message here.

You can find an archive of the mid-continuum webpage here.

On their webpage, Vickis explained that mid-continuum was a label for anyone who felt like they had dissociated parts and fell somewhere in the middle on the dissociative continuum model. A quote from the homepage:

“Everyone dissociates. At one end of the dissociative continuum is ‘normal’ or ‘common’ dissociation that nearly everyone engages in[…] At the other end are the behaviors that characterize ‘classical’ multiples, who may have large numbers of very distinct insiders with little internal communication, serious difficulties with time loss, amnesia, and so on.

Between these two extremes, there is a lot of gray. Ranging from having different ‘roles’ that you live out in different situations, to having an ‘inner child’ or ‘inner children’ with varying degrees of separateness, to having ‘ego states,’ ‘parts’ or ‘fragments’ that don’t seem to be whole people, to having some but not all of the diagnostic criteria for what is now known as DID[…]”

3. It was created out of respect for folks with DID.

At the time of mid-continuum’s coinage, the DID diagnosis was still usually called MPD or multiplicity in the online dissociative community. Several people, including Vickis, believed that it was disrespectful to call themselves multiple if they didn’t have DID. This seemed to be another reason why Vickis coined the mid-continuum. They believed that calling their own experiences multiplicity would minimize the struggles of those who experienced DID.

From their essay on the subject (archive here):

“[…] someone elsewhere in this thread said something like ‘I don’t want to call myself multiple because I don’t want to minimize the sufferings of those who are really multiple’. And I can really relate to that. That’s why I say I’m not-quite-multiple usually. Because I don’t lose time and never have, I can’t possibly know what that’s like… I don’t have barriers that prevent communication between parts… I don’t have the struggles that people who are further down the continuum from me have, and I would never want to minimize their issues by claiming that my own are the same.”

4. Mid-continuum folks often had OSDD.

A lot of Vickis’ writing on the mid-continuum reminds me of OSDD (formerly DDNOS). It makes me wonder why they did not mention it more. The only mention I could find was made in 1999, where Vickis offhandedly expressed that mid-continuum folks usually ended up diagnosed with OSDD if seeking a diagnosis. (X) It’s likely that they didn’t mention it more because there wasn’t a lot of recognition for the disorder back then, and Vickis also seemed to prefer less clinical labels for themself.

The Precursor to Median

Over several years, mid-continuum had gained quite a bit of popularity across the Internet. Many anti-psych websites began to take issue with this due to mid-continuum’s origins. For example, many psych-related words such as DID, alter, and host could be found listed as derogatory to empowered and natural multiples on Dark Personalities. (X) Mid-continuum was unfortunately subjected to this as well. “Since many people feel the idea of a continuum to be inaccurate, many are seeking a new term instead of mid-continuum,” Dark Personalities stated. It wouldn’t be long before some anti-psyches tackled this challenge.

What was Median?

1.  It was created to replace mid-continuum.

In 2003, the natural multiplicity organizations Lancers & Pavilion decided to take action. (Read my post on Lancers/Pavilion here.) They stated that it was a mistake for the mid-continuum to be based on psychology and dissociation. (X) Furthermore, they seemed to be a bit perturbed that Vickis believed multiplicity was exclusively caused by trauma. (X) As a way to right what they saw as wrong, they came up with the term median to replace mid-continuum. (X)

On the Pavilion website, Astraea’s Web wrote an essay on the midcontinuum and why they came up with the median label to replace it. You can read that essay here. This excerpt sticks out to me the most:

“It’s important to allow the concept to be inclusive of everyone who fits, regardless of past abuse history or origins, much as is currently being done for ‘multiplicity.’ With its roots in the abuse-dissociation model, midcontinuum is too limiting; it is no longer useful to us. Median creates a certain measure of psychological distance and gives the concept a fresh start, without the dissociative baggage of the past, and embraces all who feel they are more than one.”

To summarize, mid-continuum was a label that was created by dissociative folks for dissociative folks. Non-dissociative anti-psychs decided to replace it because it wasn’t useful or inclusive enough for them, and it was too psychological. That’s why they came up with median.

2. It was created to exclude people with DID/OSDD.

The Lancers/Pavilion did not intend for people with dissociative disorders to use the median label. Their philosophy was that people with DID/OSDD could not actually be plural, multiple, or median. The organizations believed that only “functional” and “non-disordered” individuals could be plural, multiple, or median. If a person with DID/OSDD was able to function up to their standards, then Lancers/Pavilion considered the person to no longer have DID/OSDD.

More can be read here. 

And also here.

3. It was meant to be more vague than mid-continuum.

Unlike the mid-continuum, which viewed plurality on a psychologically-backed linear continuum, the organizations presented plurality as a more loose idea. From the archived essay on Pavilion:

“Midcontinuum is helpful, but it’s rather too limiting. One can dispense with the dissociation bits at once, but you’re still left with plurality as a linear continuum, with singlethood at one end and multiplicity at the other. The concept is thus two-dimensional.

It’s probably much more realistic, given social and personal diversity, to think of plurality as a sphere, with a potentially infinite number of points; and, to remember that at different times in one’s life, one may reside at any of those points, or at no fixed abode. Postmodernist notions of identity as fluid and nonlinear may be helpful in understanding this. If you experience yourself as selves, but feel that your others are not independent of yourself, you can probably describe yourself as median.”

Their descriptions of plurality and medianhood are extremely vague and unclear. Due to all of this, it’s no wonder to me that people with DID/OSDD ended up identifying with the concept anyways, despite the organizations’ intentions.

Median & OSDD

Before ending this post, I wanted to mention that I have met many folks with OSDD who have previously identified as median systems due to the misconception that it was a synonym for OSDD. I remember, when I first joined the online community, someone told me that “median system” was actually coined by people with OSDD. As you can read above, this definitely isn’t true. If you have OSDD and you identify as median, that’s fine, but I still occasionally see people spreading misinformation about it which is why I felt that it was important to include this note here!