What makes a person? What underlying traits define our identities? Why do so many identities overlap with each other? How do we form relationships with other people? What are different frameworks with which to handle those relationships?
These are some of the questions that I will be attempting to cover in this article. First off, a little background. A long time ago, in a place not too far away, I casually remarked that personality traits were like lego pieces, and we, as people are basically a collection of those pieces put together in unique ways. From that first basic premise, I spent the next few years expanding upon my general theory of modular personalities. I wrote about this theory several times on my old web page, but that was half a lifetime ago, and I’ve grown and changed, and I think it’s time to revamp my theory a bit. Be warned, this will probably meander a bit, that’s just my neurodivergent brain getting sidetracked. Don’t expect perfection or a completely objective theory either, it’s not a university thesis, it’s a post in layman's terms being posted on social media. With that out of the way, let’s get started.
First off each aspect of a person could be called a module. Not everyone has the same set of modules in their personal configuration, and the make-up of the modules can vary tremendously from person to person. That’s because each module is made up of smaller components. We could break it down further and say each of those components is made up of sub-components, but at that point we’re getting a bit too abstract, so let’s keep it with just one layer for now. Some modules work together for instance, I have an autism module, and an ADHD module, and while they are separate, they definitely work together. These are not modules that everyone has. My ADHD module has both inattentive and hyperactive components. So I get the best of both worlds!
Now looking at modules that everyone has, we all have a social interaction module, which may be made up of multiple components which tend to fall into two categories, introverted components, and extroverted components. Depending on how many components of each category are in our social interaction module, we may identify as an intervert, extrovert, or ambivert. I’d say about ¾ of my social interaction module is made up of interverted components, while the rest is extroverted components. Which puts me somewhere between introvert and ambivert. I’ll totally identify as either one depending on the amount I want to explain the concept.
There are modules that the majority of us have in various configurations, that can be made up of all kinds of components. Both the sexual orientation module, and romantic orientation module can be made up of components representing different genders. Heterosexuals will have mostly components representing a gender other than their own. Homosexuals will have mostly their own gender. Bisexual/pansexual people will have a ratio of multiple genders that may not be equal, but places them outside the hetero or homo range. I for instance probably have a ratio of 4:1 other-gender to same-gender components in both my sexual and romantic orientation modules. I still identify as bi even if I may never act on the same-sex attractions. That they exist is enough. Some people’s modules have more components than others, and are shaped differently, and sometimes have connections to other modules. For people who fall somewhere on the asexual or aromantic spectrum, they may have far fewer components in their sexuality and/or romantic orientation modules respectively, or the components they do have are put together in a way that makes them more difficult to create connections with other people. Not that we’ve gotten to that part yet.
Add-on modules and components to the sexual/romantic modules may include kinks, fetishes, paraphilias, and secondary preferences (both physical and personality based.) Again not everyone is going to have these modules or components, and even if they do, their individual configurations are going to be vastly different.
The sexual and romantic modules are just two among a set of modules related to attraction to other people, the foundation of interpersonal relationships. We also have other attraction modules: platonic, social, familial, organisational, etc. Again the configuration of these modules differs from person to person, and they may be split into further sub-modules or sub-components. The examples I give are simply what I think of as a simple base set of interpersonal attraction modules.
Now we’re going to discuss how our interpersonal attraction modules interact with other people. For every unique individual we know, we have one or more attractions generated towards those people. The attractions may be either passive (observational, often unconscious), or active (conscious, influencing). For simplicity sake, let’s think of each of these as being a thread that emerges from the module, and reaches out towards the other person. Active threads are large and vibrant, while passive threads are nearly invisible, but still there. A relationship is formed when one or more of these threads connects with the corresponding thread from the other person. So in the example of friends, you both have platonic attraction towards each other, so those threads have connected, creating a platonic relationship. There’s often more than one thread connected, say platonic and social (a friend you hang out with in social environments), social and organisational (a coworker or member of a club you are a part of), or any combination of any of them.
In our current society, special significance is given to sexual and romantic attractions. If you have a mutual sexual and/or romantic connection with another person, it’s seen to be on a different level by much of society. My opinion on this as a relationship anarchist is obviously going to differ from mainstream society, but recognizing the special significance does exist is important, as while we don’t have to believe in or follow social norms, if we’re not aware of them, we’re going to be in for a huge surprise!
Now an even more important thing: just because you have a particular attraction towards a particular person, does not mean they are going to have the same attraction towards you, or at least not in a compatible form (connecting an active attraction to a passive attraction for instance, might create a relationship bond, but it certainly won’t be as strong as one made of two active attractions.) Asymmetrical and asynchronous attractions are probably more common than mutual attractions. How to handle your feelings when you find yourself in this all too common experience will determine what kind of person you are. Do you accept the asymmetrical nature of the attraction, and work to strengthen the relationship you do have? Do you keep pushing the other person hoping they’ll magically develop mutual attractions, only annoying them, and potentially driving them away? Do you become bitter and erode the existing relationship, as well as poison any future relationships? Or do you break the threads you do have with the person, separating yourself entirely, destroying what could have been a perfectly fine relationship? I know which of those options I’d choose (small hint, it’s the one that doesn’t ruin your existing relationship[s].)
Now a term I’ve learned, popular in the ace/aro community, but applicable to anyone who experiences ambiguous attractions, is alterous attraction. Alterous attraction is a form of ambiguous attraction where a few different threads may have gotten tangled up while reaching out towards the other person. Now even you aren’t quite sure what to think about how you feel. Is this a crush? Or just a desire to be a deep platonic friend? Who knows! Alterous attractions are not only confusing for the person experiencing them, but can also be for the person[s] towards whom the attractions are aimed. Are they flirting with me? Or just being friendly? (Maybe both?) Having experienced alterous attraction from both sides, I honestly can’t say which side is more confusing.
Now, with all this said, the last thing to keep in mind about the threads of attraction is, they aren’t static! You may at some point develop an attraction towards someone that never existed before. A passive attraction might become an active attraction; or maybe the reverse. You might even retract an existing attraction entirely.
Speaking of static and dynamic concepts, we need to leave the attraction threads, and return to the concept of personality modules. Some modules are mostly static. I will never cease being autistic, I will never not have ADHD. However even these mostly static modules may have slightly dynamic properties. For instance, I may reconfigure my ADHD module into a different configuration with the use of medication, meditation, or other means.
Likewise, a person’s sexual orientation module will likely always stay within a certain ratio, but the internal components may be reconfigured, sometimes rarely, sometimes often. A bi/pan person with a near 1:1 ratio of components may reconfigure their module so that for a time they are interested in only people of differing gender, while later on they become only interested in people of the same gender. When you hear the phrase, “sexuality is fluid”, this is what that is referring to. I don’t think a person in the heterosexual range can become homosexual, or vice versa, but for people in the large bisexual range, “fluid” attraction is definitely a thing!
More dynamic modules may pertain to a person’s interests. Something that greatly fascinates them today, might be worthy of a large module to handle their obsession with that topic. Sometimes these interest modules last a lifetime, other times they are reduced in size later on, or even removed entirely as the interests change. Until 7 years ago, I had a very minimal interest in martial arts, and certainly didn’t have a dedicated martial arts module. I may have had a couple small martial arts related components in my general “athletic entertainment” module. Since starting martial arts for myself though, I’ve not only installed a full blown martial arts module, but I’ve upgraded it several times.
Anyway, this is nowhere near a complete description of my theory of modular personalities, nor the interconnected theory of attraction or theory of relationships, but it’s an overview that attempts to show how they are all connected. I will expand upon all these theories, focusing on specific portions in many follow up articles (mostly on the relationship side of things, since this was written for the Theory of Relationships page, but I won't limit myself to just those topics.) In the meantime, feel free to ask questions in the comments section, or by private message if you don't want the questions to be public. Cheers!