How Personality Determines Dominant or Submissive Energy, and its Relation to Sexes

How Personality Determines Dominant or Submissive Energy, and its Relation to Sexes

Hello Guest! Sign up to join the discussion below...
Page 1 of 8 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 77
Thank Tree51Thanks

This is a discussion on How Personality Determines Dominant or Submissive Energy, and its Relation to Sexes within the Cognitive Functions forums, part of the Personality Type Forums category; Jewish mythology mentions how Lilith was chosen as Adam's first wife, and rejected Adam, because she does not want to ...

  1. #1
    INFJ - The Protectors

    How Personality Determines Dominant or Submissive Energy, and its Relation to Sexes

    Jewish mythology mentions how Lilith was chosen as Adam's first wife, and rejected Adam, because she does not want to be submissive. Before, I understand this in a more physical context, though after learning about how everything is energy, this might be viewed in terms of energy exchange. It is possible that dominant and submissive energy fields are present in all organisms, and transcend the sex domains of male or female. The dominance or submissiveness of this energy field is associated with personality types, and below is a presentation of personality types (grouped by cognitive function usage), and their rank order in the dominance spectrum:

    Most dominant or least submissive energy fields
    1. ENTP, INTP, ESFJ, ISFJ (Ne, Ti, Fe, Si) - Most dominant

    2. INTJ, ENTJ, ISFP, ESFP (Ni, Te, Fi, Se) - Second most dominant

    3. INFJ, ENFJ, ISTP, ESTP (Ni, Fe, Ti, Se) - Third most dominant

    4. ENFP, INFP, ESTJ, ISTJ (Ne, Fi, Te, Si) - Least dominant
    Least dominant or most submissive energy fields

    Viewing the Biblical story about Lilith and Adam in this context, it is possible, for example, that Lilith is ENTP, who rejected Adam after refusing to submit, and instead, Adam married Eve, who happens to be ENFP. This dominant or submissive energy might be a precursor to the appearance of sexes. It determines the method of exchange involving energy and information transfer. The concept is very speculative, though the idea does shed light on the presence of dominant or submissive energies in people, according to their personality types.

    The energy described has to do with sexual attraction, in finding suitable mates, and not how someone organizes his environment. The dominant or submissive aspect has to do with how the first living organisms are not differentiated by male or female, therefore, dominant or submissive energy fields play a role in information or energy exchange. This thread is based on the same thread in the Philosophy or Critical Thinking forum, which is suggested to be discussed in the Cognitive Functions forum as well. Thank you.

    Based on this thread:
    On the Subject of Dominant or Submissive Energy, Personality Types, and the Sexes
    Last edited by Sparky; 01-19-2014 at 09:03 PM.
    snail thanked this post.



  2. #2
    Unknown

    Can you be more specific in defining what you mean by dominant and submissive energy? For instance, do you mean dominant in terms of being more active in finding a romantic partner, or in taking control in an already established relationship?

    And are you saying this with the premise that most romantic relationships have one person who has dominant energy and one with submissive energy? Or that some dominant people like other dominant people and vice versa?

  3. #3
    INFJ - The Protectors

    Quote Originally Posted by RedTree View Post
    Can you be more specific in defining what you mean by dominant and submissive energy? For instance, do you mean dominant in terms of being more active in finding a romantic partner, or in taking control in an already established relationship?

    And are you saying this with the premise that most romantic relationships have one person who has dominant energy and one with submissive energy? Or that some dominant people like other dominant people and vice versa?
    Dominant or submissive energy is associated with more of the mental aspect in human relationships and sexuality. It is a better match if a couple includes one having dominant energy, and another with submissive energy, like a marker and its cap.

  4. #4
    ESFJ - The Caregivers

    As an ESFJ with a strong feminine essence, I can't understand ESFJ listed as having stronger dominant energy than ENTJ and ESTJ. Anyway, you may be interested in the work of David Deida, specifically his writings about the masculine essence and the feminine essence. Perhaps both Adam and Lilith had a masculine essence, and Eve had a feminine essence.

  5. #5
    INFJ - The Protectors

    Quote Originally Posted by k1123 View Post
    As an ESFJ with a strong feminine essence, I can't understand ESFJ listed as having stronger dominant energy than ENTJ and ESTJ. Anyway, you may be interested in the work of David Deida, specifically his writings about the masculine essence and the feminine essence. Perhaps both Adam and Lilith had a masculine essence, and Eve had a feminine essence.
    Energy does not differentiate between masculinity or femininity, because it does not deal with male or female, only dominant or submissive. Your definition of "strong feminine essence" might mean "high dominant energy as a woman," in this example.

  6. #6
    ESFJ - The Caregivers

    The terms are from David Deida. Feminine essence is about being more comfortable in the submissive role. I'm into serving people, not controlling them. Now if we're talking about the environment around me, yeah, I'm comfortable controlling that. Btw women can have a masculine essence, and men can have a feminine essence. I hope you do check out his work -- it nicely explains why Adam and Lilith were incompatible.

  7. #7
    Unknown

    Quote Originally Posted by Sparky View Post
    Jewish mythology mentions how Lilith was chosen as Adam's first wife, and rejected Adam, because she does not want to be submissive. Before, I understand this in a more physical context, though after learning about how everything is energy, this might be viewed in terms of energy exchange. It is possible that dominant and submissive energy fields are present in all organisms, and transcend the sex domains of male or female. The dominance or submissiveness of this energy field is associated with personality types, and below is a presentation of personality types (grouped by cognitive function usage), and their rank order in the dominance spectrum:
    What energy fields and how is it related to personality type? There are several different schools of thought that work on energy fields and attach different meanings to them, so it's new to me to see one that correlates them with MBTI type. You can say that they're present because you believe in their presence, but whether or not you're right and whether or not I want to agree with you, I need to see what sources you have to establish the connection you've made below.

    Yes, dominance and submissiveness as personality traits don't have to do anything with being male or female inasmuch as they are societal gender roles assigned to males and females. I mean, what then are you going to call people who are nonbinary? Being nonbinary doesn't mean you have completely neutral personality traits, so that wouldn't apply here either.

    Most dominant or least submissive energy fields
    1. ENTP, INTP, ESFJ, ISFJ (Ne, Ti, Fe, Si) - Most dominant

    2. INTJ, ENTJ, ISFP, ESFP (Ni, Te, Fi, Se) - Second most dominant

    3. INFJ, ENFJ, ISTP, ESTP (Ni, Fe, Ti, Se) - Third most dominant

    4. ENFP, INFP, ESTJ, ISTJ (Ne, Fi, Te, Si) - Least dominant
    Least dominant or most submissive energy fields
    Again, why? What are you basing this on? If you read Socionics you'll see how Se-valuing types are often portrayed as more powerful and likelier to want to be "dominant", for instance. So I don't see how you can say Ne-Si and Ti-Fe can lend itself to more dominant energy fields? Moreover, what sort of energy?

    Anyway, if energy fields exist then I think they'd be more unique to the person and their mood rather than being determined by personality type, which is only a framework to put down how we think, and not dictate what we are.

    This dominant or submissive energy might be a precursor to the appearance of sexes. It determines the method of exchange involving energy and information transfer. The concept is very speculative, though the idea does shed light on the presence of dominant or submissive energies in people, according to their personality types.

    The energy described has to do with sexual attraction, in finding suitable mates, and not how someone organizes his environment. The dominant or submissive aspect has to do with how the first living organisms are not differentiated by male or female, therefore, dominant or submissive energy fields play a role in information or energy exchange.

    Transfer of information is more readily possible with people who share the same functions, and people who share the same functions but in different orders can be more dominant or submissive in certain aspects of their cognition, but that's about as far as it goes. I don't see how sexual attraction plays into this? Unless ok you're going to be more attracted to someone who can understand you. Otherwise, I wouldn't use type to determine if someone is dominating or submissive at all, no. That depends on the person.

    You do realize that not everyone necessarily even believes in Adam and Eve and Lilith, by the way? So creating a theory that automatically assumes their existence makes the theory pretty limited because it cannot apply across religions.

    You are right in saying the concept is speculative. And that is all it will remain unless you shed some clarity on your theory and prove it.
    Entropic, d e c a d e n t and MelBel thanked this post.

  8. #8
    Unknown Personality

    I agree with what's been said here about gender roles. I don't believe for a second that dominant equates with male even when it's present in women, just that our society's roles have established men as dominant and women as submissive. It makes no sense to me to call being dominant "having male energy" or vice-versa, that's just nonsense. That's not to say that either of them is necessarily the wrong way to be, just that it annoys me when people try to make it relate to gender as though it's a default.

    If anything, we could try to guess which types are more likely to adhere to convention, including gender roles.

    In my opinion, being dominant or submissive in romantic or sexual relationships isn't related to type. It's just about individual personality and what people feel most comfortable doing. The MBTI is about how you gather information and process the world around you, two people who think similarly can have different roles in their relationships because of their individual preferences, their reasoning for it, the relationships themselves.
    Entropic, mirrorghost, ninjahitsawall and 1 others thanked this post.

  9. #9
    INFJ - The Protectors

    Quote Originally Posted by Amaterasu View Post
    What energy fields and how is it related to personality type? There are several different schools of thought that work on energy fields and attach different meanings to them, so it's new to me to see one that correlates them with MBTI type. You can say that they're present because you believe in their presence, but whether or not you're right and whether or not I want to agree with you, I need to see what sources you have to establish the connection you've made below.

    Yes, dominance and submissiveness as personality traits don't have to do anything with being male or female inasmuch as they are societal gender roles assigned to males and females. I mean, what then are you going to call people who are nonbinary? Being nonbinary doesn't mean you have completely neutral personality traits, so that wouldn't apply here either.



    Again, why? What are you basing this on? If you read Socionics you'll see how Se-valuing types are often portrayed as more powerful and likelier to want to be "dominant", for instance. So I don't see how you can say Ne-Si and Ti-Fe can lend itself to more dominant energy fields? Moreover, what sort of energy?

    Anyway, if energy fields exist then I think they'd be more unique to the person and their mood rather than being determined by personality type, which is only a framework to put down how we think, and not dictate what we are.


    Transfer of information is more readily possible with people who share the same functions, and people who share the same functions but in different orders can be more dominant or submissive in certain aspects of their cognition, but that's about as far as it goes. I don't see how sexual attraction plays into this? Unless ok you're going to be more attracted to someone who can understand you. Otherwise, I wouldn't use type to determine if someone is dominating or submissive at all, no. That depends on the person.

    You do realize that not everyone necessarily even believes in Adam and Eve and Lilith, by the way? So creating a theory that automatically assumes their existence makes the theory pretty limited because it cannot apply across religions.

    You are right in saying the concept is speculative. And that is all it will remain unless you shed some clarity on your theory and prove it.
    The energy discussed is specifically sexual energy. It is about how you fantasize when you are sexually aroused or masturbating. For example, an INFJ man fantasizing having sex with an ENFP woman will likely play the role of a man in the fantasy, dominating the bedroom. If the INFJ man is fantasizing sex with an ENTP girl, dominating becomes more awkward, and he might surrender to the role of a woman (becoming more submissive) in the fantasy, allowing his "partner" to call the shots.
    Last edited by Sparky; 01-20-2014 at 06:34 PM.

  10. #10

    Quote Originally Posted by Sparky View Post
    The energy discussed is specifically sexual energy. It is about how you fantasize when you are sexually aroused or masturbating. For example, an INFJ man fantasizing having sex with an ENFP woman will likely play the role of a man in the fantasy, dominating the bedroom. If the INFJ man is fantasizing sex with an ENTP girl, dominating becomes more awkward, and he might surrender to the role of a woman (becoming more submissive) in the fantasy, allowing his "partner" to call the shots.
    Actually, this is what socionics writes about the Ne type when engaging in a relationship:

    Infantile

    (Redirected from Infantile group)
    The Infantile types, identified as such by Viktor Gulenko, are the four types with (Ne) in their ego, two each in Alpha and Delta: ILE (ENTP), LII (INTP), IEE (ENFP), and EII (INFP).
    Despite the differences between these types in terms of temperament, base function, and quadra values, it seems that in the area of physical attraction, desire, and flirting, the ego element (Ne), coupled with their expectations of (Si) style behavior in intimate partners, is the most visible factor in determining "infantile'" behavior.


    Typical characteristics of the Infantile romance style


    • interest is sparked in partner with positive aesthetic attributes divorced from active, "aggressive" sexuality
    • tend to try to attract partner's interest with joking, goofy or even "strange" behavior
    • try to help partner see the unexpected and fun side of things
    • interest is maintained or cools off according to partner's response to this behavior
    • appreciation for partner who actively cares about the individual's comfort and daily needs
    • neutral with regard to externally admitting who took the initiative in ending a relationship, "power" is seen as unimportant in such matters


    This romance style is defined by focus on (Ne) which is static, irrational, and extroverted, with perceptions focused on possibilities and alternatives to the static present reality, which the individual perceives as intrinsically boring and stagnant. This means that an Infantile sees attraction between two individuals as a static state, also from the point of view of the other person, which he tries to "get moving" by actively thinking of variations of the present static state. This accounts for an Infantile's inclination to focus on the mutual attraction, or particularly the attraction felt by the other person, as connected to that person's being exposed to the unexpected, imaginative, fun, even "weird" side of life, reality, and each other, a behavior that can be described as "childlike". This focus leads to a sort of helplessness regarding his own physical well being as perceived by (Si), so he welcomes help from others in that area.
    Perception of other romance styles

    This refers to perceptions of the partner in a romantic or prospective relationship.

    Aggressor: Infantiles tend to perceive Aggressors as a bit too "rough" and even slightly scary on occasion, or perhaps just as obnoxious
    Victim: Infantiles tend to perceive Victims as paranoid and confusing, giving mixed signals.
    Caregiver: Infantiles tend to perceive Caregivers as comforting and pleasant company, with a delightful sense of fun.
    Infantile: Infantiles tend to perceive other Infantiles as fun to spend time with but also as helpless and demanding in a way that they see as stressful.

    Compared to Se:

    Aggressor
    (Redirected from Aggressor group)
    The Aggressor types, identified as such by Viktor Gulenko, are the four types with (Se) in their ego, two each in Beta and Gamma: SLE (ESTP), LSI (ISTP), ESI (ISFP), and SEE (ESFP).
    Despite the differences between these types in terms of temperament, base function, and quadra values, it seems that in the area of physical attraction, desire, flirting, and the like, in intimate relationships, the irrational ego element (Se), coupled with their expectations of (Ni) style behavior in intimate partners, is the most visible factor in an Aggressor's behavior.


    Typical characteristics of the Aggressor romance style


    • no doubts about own interest in another person
    • not prone to hesitation about whether or not to reveal that interest
    • focus is more on own interest than whether or not the other person might reciprocate
    • romantic interaction is more about "toughness" than "tenderness"
    • needs to feel some sense of "superiority" over the partner, but worthwhile only if the partner is seen as able to largely "keep up"
    • this takes the form of power games, which others might regard as cruel or bitchy
    • in the case of female Aggressors with male partners, the above tends to assume the characteristic of a woman expecting total devotion from the partner, rather than her being "bossy"
    • little inclination to externally admit not having been the one to end a relationship, unless if adopting a "who cares" front simultaneously


    This romance style is defined by focus on (Se) which is static, irrational, and extroverted. This means that an Aggressor sees attraction to another person as a static state, which he feels it is up to him to change in the direction more in agreement to his preference. This accounts for an Aggressor's inclination to take the initiative in approaching the object of his interest and being "relentless" in his pursuit, as well as, even during an established relationship, continuing to try to "shake things up" or "get things moving". If his partner is not receptive to such behavior, this discourages the Aggressor, and results in his interest cooling off.

    Perception of other romance styles
    This refers to perceptions of the partner in a romantic or prospective relationship.
    Aggressor: Aggressors tend to perceive other Aggressors as exciting partners worthy of admiration and respect, but ultimately unsatisfactory due to a sense of never-ending competition for an ill-defined "upper hand", which becomes frustrating.
    Victim: Aggressors tend to perceive Victims simultaneously as pleasantly able to "keep up" regarding more "intensive" interactions, and also as not annoyingly prone to always wanting "to win". Aggressor women perceive Victim men as totally devoted yet reassuringly "strong".
    Caregiver: Aggressors tend to perceive Caregivers as somewhat boring and patronizing.
    Infantile: Agressors tend to perceive Infantiles as too goofy and unexciting, ultimately not taking them seriously as partners.







     
Page 1 of 8 1 2 3 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. [ISFP] Dominant or Submissive?
    By NekoNinja in forum ISFP Forum - The Artists
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 06-02-2011, 02:50 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:38 AM.
Information provided on the site is meant to complement and not replace any advice or information from a health professional.
© 2014 PersonalityCafe
 

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0