no names for all the different parts, is it ok?

I am new to all of this; recently diagnosed, although I have really "known" it for a long time. I do not seem to have any names for any of my parts. Mostly, the parts remain unknown to me, but not unknown to others in my circle of family and friends. My therapist has asked a couple of times, "And what is YOUR name?" But I only have one name -- mine. One name for all of me/us. Will that change? Will I eventually know parts of myself by different names? I don't feel comfortable with that idea right now.

Donna-1 wrote:Will that change?

Almost certainly yes, that will change. When you are ready.

It was quite a shock to me when my Alter 2 suddenly spoke up and announced that from then on he wanted to be called ____. He still does not want other people knowing his name though, because he does not want other people to be able to call him out front.

Not wanting to acknowledge any names for parts of you which go by different names is, as Una says, a form of denial by the host. It's very common for the host, the main part out, usually most of the time, to want to maintain control and it's usual to move back and forth over time between acceptance and denial. Denial helps keep away knowledge of the bad stuff, so it's not entirely unhealthy. On the other hand, there's no question that the greater self acceptance you have, the more acceptance of each part of you (whether you're multiple or not), the closer you are to internal cooperation and stability.

These other parts are you, just as the part of you that you associate with being you, is you. You're all one person. To deny the validity of the desires of other parts, in the long run, just doesn't work. If part of you wants to do something bad or destructive, it makes sense to hold that in check. If part of you wants something for themselves that is not destructive, it makes sense to allow it. Referring to them by names they want seems, currently for you, to fell dangerous to your sense of sense. It's understandable but may not be sustainable. I suggest it's counterproductive if something else doesn't change.

We have a refrain we've use internally to me that was borrowed from the gay community. Consider the word queer below in its meaning before it connoted homosexual -- unusual, different from some conventional point of view, like the host's image of self. We're here, we're queer, get used to it.

Several of my alters want to speak up even more strongly against the stance some of you here have taken about names but I'm convincing them to let me reply because they nearly wouldn't be as polite.

Johnny-Jack wrote:These other parts are you, just as the part of you that you associate with being you, is you. You're all one person. To deny the validity of the desires of other parts, in the long run, just doesn't work. If part of you wants to do something bad or destructive, it makes sense to hold that in check. If part of you wants something for themselves that is not destructive, it makes sense to allow it.

Eventually I stopped searching for the non-existent upvote button