Age In Systems
Age in systems is a confusing and tricky subject a lot of people have misconceptions about. This article seeks to fix this while also being an introduction to the concept of headmates with different denoted ages.
In system spaces the age of a system member refers to a lot of different concepts at once, and many systems do not specify what concept they actually mean when they talk about it. This can make communication about this topic very tricky and prone to misunderstandings.
The short of it
Age in systems can refer to:
- The age of the body
- What they feel is their 'cognitive age'
- What age they just generally 'feel like'
- What age their conception of self 'looks like'
- What age they appear as in their inner world
- What age they feel they 'should be'
- How long they have been in the system
A system may even mean a unique combination of these.
These ages may:
- Be 'mismatched'
- Change or stay static over time
- Be unclear or imprecise to the headmate and the system
Headmates that have a sense of age that does not match the body may also be called 'age incongruent'. Age incongruency is also seen in singlets.
Some experiences that people who are age incongruence may have:
- General dysphoria or discomfort related to the body or perceptions of others regarding age.
- General euphoria or enjoyment regarding appearance looking younger/older or being treated as part of a certain age demographic.
- Feeling like things are much bigger or smaller than they 'should' be.
- Feeling 'too young' or 'too old' to do something despite being capable of it.
- Cognitive impairments or delays that the other headmates do not experience in areas such as reasoning, impulse control, speech, ability to consent, or other skills that are associated with how children act or think.
- Impulses to do 'childlike' things.
- Enjoyment and preference towards things 'for children' or for things the system enjoyed when they were young.
- Amnesia for skills and memories gained during the body's adulthood.
- Desire to be treated like or be taken care of the way a child is taken care of.
Some system demographics are more likely to use certain definitions than others.
Tulpamancers, for example, are more likely to talk about how long their tulpa has existed in the system and celebrate this as a kind of birthday.
In contrast, systems with very detailed and rich inner worlds are more likely to consider their inner world appearance as their 'true' age.
In general, its best to ask individual systems what they mean specifically when they denote age and how to treat headmates they indicate are not the same age as the body. This way, one is less likely to be mistaken on what that system actually means when they say age.
Each system is going to be different, and each individual system is allowed to determine for themselves what metrics they use to determine age and what they should do about it- so long as the legal line regarding the age of the body is followed.
It is CRITICALLY important to remember that the legal age is the only one that matters in court!
Terms people use
There are many terms for headmates with certain ages, here are a few more popular ones with definitions:
- Little - A headmate younger than the body, or a child headmate. Syskid is an alternate term to use that is not also used by the kink community.
- Middle - A headmate younger than the body that is specifically a teen. Technically a kind of little. Has fallen out of frequent use in more recent times.
- Big - An adult headmate. Has fallen out of use in more recent times.
- Agevague - A headmate with a vague or uncertain age.
- Ageslider - A headmate that changes in age over time.
- Ageless - A headmate that does not have an age.
As these terms do not specify what the system means by 'age' it is important to clarify with the system in question before assuming that you know what is being said about that headmate.
How to treat age incongruent headmates
This is something that varies from system to system and individual headmate to headmate.
The general answer to a question of 'how to I treat x kind of member in a system' is always going to be ask the system and the headmate what they prefer. One can avoid a lot of grief by doing this in advance or providing this information in advance.
Every system is different, and thus what is helpful, affirming, and comfortable for one system may not be for another.
So long as the letter of the law is followed according to the body, just treat them how they would prefer to be treated.
Some systems may want their littles to be treated exactly like a body-age child of the same age with the expectation of behavior to be that of a body-age child, others want their littles to be treated like adults, just with the expectation that they may behave 'childishly'. Yet more will prefer other things.
If you want to know what your little should be treated like, ask what your little would be comfortable with and evaluate their decisionmaking and cognitive skills to get an idea of what is appropriate for them.
Some systems will know this intuitively due to how their system operates, others will need to discover this through trial and error over a period of time.
If a little can cognitively handle it without ill effects on a case by case basis AND wishes to do so, there is no reason your little cannot go to work if they wish, curse, take drugs, or enjoy sexual activities- provided you are legally allowed to do so.
On the flip side, headmates that are older than the body do have to remember they are limited by it. Their peers are other people around the age of the body, not those in their identified age bracket. Entities that live in the brain are limited by the hardware they are running on- that is the age of the brain. Allowing an adult headmate in a minor body to take on adult-level responsibilities is a quick way to make that headmate burn out.
Legally when these headmates are in minor bodies, these headmates cannot have adult privileges and should not be given them.
If they feel uncomfortable dating others who have the same body age bracket, they should wait until the body reaches majority to do so rather than try to date legal adults.
Criticism of Age Incongruent Identification In Systems
There is a lot of criticism surrounding how the plural community talks about age- some of it valid, some of it less so.
Part of it comes from the worry that people are going to start ignoring legal age in favor of the other ages- a fear that is somewhat founded. There are a number of bodily minors that assert that an adult headmate should be allowed to interact in romantic or sexual ways with other adults because they are 'mentally an adult'. To stop this, some people overcorrect and insist the only age that matters is the body.
Another huge camp of people who dislike the way many in the community talk about age incongruent headmates is the clinical hardliners, which are often incredibly dismissive of ages that are not the body and often insist that all other senses of age are a 'cognitive distortion' or a 'delusion' that should be overcome. While it can be the case for some systems that their sense of their age was indeed a detrimental dissociative symptom and was happily overcome, this is definitely not the same for all systems.
It is also worth noting that some clinical perspectives should be kept in mind in general- such as the fact that from a psychological only perspective, the body age is the oldest anyone in the system can 'really' be, as the brain only has that amount of growth and the headmates are operating in the brain.
Many people against this kind of identification also feel that most people have a very inaccurate view of childhood and adulthood- and much of the age identification is more based on this than a material experience of being a 'real' child/adult. While pointing out that many people view age-related behaviors and 'mindsets' in a stereotypical and closeminded way is a valid criticism, it does not mean all age incongruence talk is like this or is without value.
There is also the strong controversy against 'mental age' as a framework in specific.
Mental age is a concept that has been used to horrifically harm mentally and intellectually disabled people and take away their rights. It is also deeply rooted in eugenics. Due to this, some systems do not use the framework of mental/cognitive age to describe headmates that have cognitive impairments and prefer to just specify those impairments if need be. Some even find anyone using the term offensive, whether they are reclaiming it on purpose or not.
This criticism of how age incongruence is described in plural spaces is also incredibly fair due to the ableist violence that this term has caused. It is important that if you wish to talk about the idea of mental/cognitive age that you should be aware of its history as a tool of violence.
For further reading about topic, see these links:
- What’s My Age Again: Why Mental Age Theory Hurts People with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities
- Mental Age Theory Hurts People with Intellectual Disabilities
On the flipside, being able to express non-body age in such a way can help a system to convey their experience better and find other people who have similar experiences. Many systems are helped by treating headmates according to non-body ages, and feel upset and unheard when their very real experiences are dismissed because they use the language that best describes their material experiences.
On the debate regarding if littles are 'real children'
The most accurate answer is that it depends on the system and what you mean by those words!
Different people have different definitions about what exactly being a little entails and what exactly they mean by 'real children'.
Different systems also are helped by different things, and have different rules.
Diferent headmates even in a single system are helped by different things.
The reality of the situation is that all-or-nothing statements do not work here.
Some littles are almost exactly on the level as body-age children in every way but legally and would be harmed by being treated in any other way, and some littles are on the level of the body but they just look like a kid and act like one because its comforting and would be harmed by NOT allowing them adult privileges.
Its also important to realize that just like with body-age children, a little may display what is considered 'unchildlike behavior' or vocabulary and still be a child in every way but the body. Even body-age children sometimes have sexual interests or may masturbate [SOURCE 1 | SOURCE 2]. This is considered developmentally normal and this grace should be extended to littles.
In the end, it is best to allow individual systems to make the call to treat and consider littles 'real children' at their own discretion rather than apply this judgement or withhold it overall.
Determining Capacity to Consent
Yes, yes, here come the raised pitchforks.
Capacity to consent in littles in particular (presuming the body is over AoC) is quite a sticky and hot-button subject.
There are hardliners on both sides making all or nothing statements about this, however both are reductive and cause harm.
The least harm approach of determining this is to determine capacity to consent on a case-by-case basis.
The way capacity to consent is determined can mostly be seen in adults with intellectual disabilities being evaluated and unfortunately this is also fraught with ableist history and practice. This makes finding a way to determine this that does not tread on autonomy challenging.
The paper 'Approaches to Determine and Manage Sexual Consent Abilities for People With Cognitive Disabilities: Systematic Review' by Shaniff Esmail and Brendan Concannon [LINK] promotes the idea of an assessment that determines if the individual in question has correct knowledge, understanding, and willingness surrounding sex to be capable of consent. This comes from the three legal criteria of consent components.
The assessment areas are as follows:
- Knowledge of body parts and sexual relationships and acts.
- Knowledge of consequences from sexual relationships.
- Understanding of appropriate sexual behavior and context for it.
- Understanding of the voluntary nature of a sexual relationship.
- Ability to recognize abusive situations.
- Ability to be assertive in such situations to reject unwanted advances.
The paper also goes to conclude, "Review of the literature has established that determining consensual abilities requires a holistic approach, with individuals being considered in terms of their adaptive abilities, capacities, and human rights."
In this vein, individually assessing headmates (whether they are littles or not) for whom ability to consent is in question in this manner to see if they sufficiently pass is the current best practice way this writer has found to balance autonomy with caution. And of course- ensuring the legal line of the body is followed.
Its also worth noting that a little may be capable of consent but be sex repulsed or otherwise have no interest in sex. This is the same situation as any other person who is sex repulsed or has no interest in sex- obviously they shouldn't be involved in it and this article is NOT saying otherwise.
Common Misconceptions
This section is for going quickly over the most common misconceptions regarding age incongruent system members as a FAQ of sorts.
Littles are always exactly like body age children in every way.
As stated previously, this is not the case! 'Little' is a word that is used broadly for a number of different traits, and having every single trait on that list besides the body be 1:1 with a body age child is not required for this.
Littles are never 'real children'.
As stated previously as well, this is not the case! There are plenty of littles who are a child in every way but body, and this is as real as any other internal experience.
Littles cannot ever have adult interests.
Littles are in adult bodies with adult chemistry and often have access to memories of adult life. This and other factors can cause littles to have many interests that are not considered 'childlike'. Many body age children have 'unchildlike' interests, as well.
Alters are always the age that the body was when they formed.
False! A system member may take any appearance, identity, and personality when they form. It is not determined solely by body age. Some systems have system members like this, but not all of them.
Headmates older than the body are developmentally like body-age adults and should be treated exactly like them (including dating pool wise).
Untrue and sets a dangerous precedent, as stated previously. This is a red flag if someone states this. There is no scientific evidence that indicates that this is the case and encouraging bodily minors to date adults is going to open them up to predation. This is also legally not permissable.
Every system that has a little is likely a predator.
No. Having a system member that is age incongruent in some way does not indicate a system wishes to abuse children.
Blanket accusations of harm towards an oppressed group (via saneism) that are frequently victims of child abuse themselves is inappropriate, damaging, and untrue. A system with a younger headmate is significantly more likely to be a victim than to be a perpetrator.
All littles are just adults with a fetish making everyone else participate.
Untrue. There is a difference between feelings of age incongruence that one expresses, consenting adults participating in consensual power exchange dynamics through roleplay, and people inappropriately involving others in sexual roleplay or otherwise fetish mining.
This can be hard to spot for many people- especially because of terminology confusion, unexamined prejudice against both systems and kink, and the possibility of lying occurring.
If the person you suspect to be fetish mining keeps insistently trying to get you or others to take on the role of caregiver for them- and they don't seem to take no for an answer or try to trick or guilt you into fullfilling that, especially if you do not know them extremely well, this is a red flag.
This behavior is inappropriate whether or not it is coming from a 'real system little' or involves sexual feelings and is frowned upon by both the system community and ageplayers alike.
Every system has headmates older than the body/younger than the body.
Untrue! Many systems do not have age incongruence present. Its a common experience, but it is not required.
Littles never have trauma.
A commonly reported experience is a little who is also a trauma holder. Anyone in a system may hold or have experienced trauma.
Littles always have trauma (usually sexual trauma).
Untrue! Many littles are trauma holders, but certainly not all of them.
Littles always act like a stereotypical caricature of a child.
Again untrue. Littles may have any temperament or cognitive functioning level. Many littles are also often hypersexual due to trauma and they are not going to act like stereotypical children either. The only requirement to be a little is to identify in some way as younger than the body.
Littles need to grow up in every way to be healthy.
Age incongruence is not always something that has to be 'fixed' for a system to lead a healthy and happy life. There are many systems that lead healthy and functional lives while being mostly or entirely age incongruent, even.
Age incongruent headmates have a perfect sense of exactly what age they are internally down to the year.
Some system members may experience this, but many only have a vague idea. Exact year ages are not required to experience age incongruence.
A headmate that is older than the body is always the caretaker of the system
Not all systems have caretakers, and a headmate's age does not pigeonhole them into any role. While its common for caretakers to be on the older end, this is not always the case.
In addition, a headmate being older than the body does not mean they are necessarily equipped to take care of everyone else in the system, and expecting this can cause massive problems.
Older headmates are not necessarily more "mature" than younger ones and expecting this will only lead to problems further down the road.
Conclusions
Age in systems is a complex topic with a lot of controversy, misconceptions, and subjectivity. People use age to mean a lot of different concepts in system spaces and this can cause confusion. It is important to keep in mind the individual experiences and wishes of the system and headmates in question when determining how a given headmate should be treated- as well as the legal line.
System members with feelings of age incongruence exist and should not be treated badly for it.