[March]

Okay, that should've gotten people's attention. Of course I enjoy being convinced by a good and reasoned argument. What I mean in this case is people throwing in a (to me, random or irrelevant) fact and then hoping you'll change your mind.

Can anyone shed some light on that dynamic?

(Husband (don't know type, something with a strong Te and probably some Si/Ne, but neither ESTJ nor ISTJ profiles sound right - tested ENTJ once but doesn't resonate with Ni at all) and I (INFJ) are making list of stuff to take on motorcycle holiday next week.)
Me: I have a mind to take the chain lube. We'll be driving over 1000 km, and they say to lube the chain every 500 or so. If the can won't fit in the luggage, I don't mind leaving it at home, but put it on the list for now, OK?
Husband: Your motorcycle won't break down if you don't oil it during the holiday.
Me: So you want me to leave it at home?
Husband: Actually, yes.

Or:

(I'm waiting for the dishwasher to finish before going to bed.)
Husband: Do you want to wait up for the dishwasher?
Me: Yes. I want to give it 10 more minutes.
Husband: It can take a long time, you know!
Me: So you want me to not wait and come to bed with you?
Husband: Actually, yes.

This just drives me batty. I know my 'So you want me to X?' response isn't the most elegant ever, but it's the best I can manage given what's really going through my head.

("Aargh, if you want something ASK IT. Coward! I'm happy to give up something I want if that makes you happy, but at least give me the chance to feel good about myself doing so!")
("So not only do you want me to drop whatever I want in favour of what YOU want, you want me to decide it on my own so you don't have to feel 'bad' for keeping me from something I want?")
("I am AWARE of your random fact, mister! And you know what? It's random and irrelevant and I've thought about the weight I need to give it already! So stuff it.")
("How about you listen to what I want and WHY I WANT IT, and then try to persuade me using arguments that actually matter instead of just dropping in something random and wanting me to be all magically swayed by it.")
("Aargh! You're distracting me with a fact that's not even relevant to YOU! You don't care what I take with me on holiday! I have 'books and notepads' on the list, for crying out loud! Things that are both useless to you and likely to lead to me not paying you attention all the time. And you believe in religiously oiling your chain even though you have an automatic chain lubricator on your bike! So it's probably something about not wanting to risk the oil can to leak all over our luggage. Which is a GREAT reason! But you don't say THAT now, do you?")
("Sure, that's a really nice frame job you're attempting there. You're casting me as 'the one who wants something' and yourself as 'the voice of reason' while deftly sidestepping the facts that you also want something and that I also have logical reasons. I'm not buying it, m'dear.")

I know that the things going through my head are my own interpretation and not at all charitable. (I have something of a hair trigger when it comes to people telling me I'm not allowed to want what I want. Bad parents. My annoyance is out of proportion because of that, and also because after 12 years of us being together I still haven't been able to get my husband to understand that I really want him to not assume about what my reasons are, because he usually gets it wrong.) If you think 'Husband's' responses in the above dialogue are perfectly reasonable, could you describe what your thought process is?

(I'm looking for more 'calm yourself down, March!' arguments in my arsenal, and my Ni thrives on alternative perspectives to try on for size.)

He says his reasoning is something like:
" 1) Ah, she wants to bring the chain lube. 2) That HAS to be because she's afraid something bad will happen! 3) I don't want her to bring the chain lube, 4) so if I put her at ease, she'll no longer want to so something I don't like."

1) Sure.
2) You can't say that, really. Doesn't follow at all. Could be this reason, could be any other reason, and unless you KNOW, it's wise not to assume a) that there's only one reason and b) that just happens to be the first reason that pops into YOUR head.
3) That's fine. People want things all the time. No problem. And I like giving him what he wants.
4) Here's where I go haywire. The combination of not being direct about his wants AND trying to manipulate me based on crappy, superficial and WRONG information is just toxic to my poor brain cells. (Especially because occasionally I'll tell him off for assuming there's only one reason and he'll retort "But you didn't tell me ALL your reasons, now did you! How am I supposed to know?" even when I haven't even started telling him any of my reasons.)

So, what do you think is going on here?
His Te vs my Ti? I have a lovely little interconnected network of reasons, and he sees one superficial problem and 'solves' it and thinks it should do the trick? (Which is sometimes true, but he often doesn't investigate the problem enough to get at the superficial problem that's actually holding me back.)

My annoyance with his lack of Fe? I would prefer it if he argued from our relationship or his own wants and needs. "I just really want you to come to bed with me. Could you do the dishwasher trick tomorrow?" "Aww, sure." Instead it's 'not about feelings, but about logic!' which I'd accept if he actually gave me a logical story, but he doesn't.

Some other function-related clash?
Some stupid but not function-related habit?

It seems so natural to him that I can't imagine it's not a personality type thing.

We're both loving, generous and reasonably intelligent people, and it's not about either of us not wanting the other to be happy. It's just that the way the other tries to make us happy sometimes feels really depressing.

 

[NeedsNewNameNow]

Okay, that should've gotten people's attention. Of course I enjoy being convinced by a good and reasoned argument. What I mean in this case is people throwing in a (to me, random or irrelevant) fact and then hoping you'll change your mind.

Can anyone shed some light on that dynamic?

(Husband (don't know type, something with a strong Te and probably some Si/Ne, but neither ESTJ nor ISTJ profiles sound right - tested ENTJ once but doesn't resonate with Ni at all) and I (INFJ) are making list of stuff to take on motorcycle holiday next week.)
Me: I have a mind to take the chain lube. We'll be driving over 1000 km, and they say to lube the chain every 500 or so. If the can won't fit in the luggage, I don't mind leaving it at home, but put it on the list for now, OK?
Husband: Your motorcycle won't break down if you don't oil it during the holiday.
Me: So you want me to leave it at home?
Husband: Actually, yes.

Or:

(I'm waiting for the dishwasher to finish before going to bed.)
Husband: Do you want to wait up for the dishwasher?
Me: Yes. I want to give it 10 more minutes.
Husband: It can take a long time, you know!
Me: So you want me to not wait and come to bed with you?
Husband: Actually, yes.

This just drives me batty. I know my 'So you want me to X?' response isn't the most elegant ever, but it's the best I can manage given what's really going through my head.

("Aargh, if you want something ASK IT. Coward! I'm happy to give up something I want if that makes you happy, but at least give me the chance to feel good about myself doing so!")
("So not only do you want me to drop whatever I want in favour of what YOU want, you want me to decide it on my own so you don't have to feel 'bad' for keeping me from something I want?")
("I am AWARE of your random fact, mister! And you know what? It's random and irrelevant and I've thought about the weight I need to give it already! So stuff it.")
("How about you listen to what I want and WHY I WANT IT, and then try to persuade me using arguments that actually matter instead of just dropping in something random and wanting me to be all magically swayed by it.")
("Aargh! You're distracting me with a fact that's not even relevant to YOU! You don't care what I take with me on holiday! I have 'books and notepads' on the list, for crying out loud! Things that are both useless to you and likely to lead to me not paying you attention all the time. And you believe in religiously oiling your chain even though you have an automatic chain lubricator on your bike! So it's probably something about not wanting to risk the oil can to leak all over our luggage. Which is a GREAT reason! But you don't say THAT now, do you?")
("Sure, that's a really nice frame job you're attempting there. You're casting me as 'the one who wants something' and yourself as 'the voice of reason' while deftly sidestepping the facts that you also want something and that I also have logical reasons. I'm not buying it, m'dear.")

I know that the things going through my head are my own interpretation and not at all charitable. (I have something of a hair trigger when it comes to people telling me I'm not allowed to want what I want. Bad parents. My annoyance is out of proportion because of that, and also because after 12 years of us being together I still haven't been able to get my husband to understand that I really want him to not assume about what my reasons are, because he usually gets it wrong.) If you think 'Husband's' responses in the above dialogue are perfectly reasonable, could you describe what your thought process is?

(I'm looking for more 'calm yourself down, March!' arguments in my arsenal, and my Ni thrives on alternative perspectives to try on for size.)

He says his reasoning is something like:
" 1) Ah, she wants to bring the chain lube. 2) That HAS to be because she's afraid something bad will happen! 3) I don't want her to bring the chain lube, 4) so if I put her at ease, she'll no longer want to so something I don't like."

1) Sure.
2) You can't say that, really. Doesn't follow at all. Could be this reason, could be any other reason, and unless you KNOW, it's wise not to assume a) that there's only one reason and b) that just happens to be the first reason that pops into YOUR head.
3) That's fine. People want things all the time. No problem. And I like giving him what he wants.
4) Here's where I go haywire. The combination of not being direct about his wants AND trying to manipulate me based on crappy, superficial and WRONG information is just toxic to my poor brain cells. (Especially because occasionally I'll tell him off for assuming there's only one reason and he'll retort "But you didn't tell me ALL your reasons, now did you! How am I supposed to know?" even when I haven't even started telling him any of my reasons.)

So, what do you think is going on here?
His Te vs my Ti? I have a lovely little interconnected network of reasons, and he sees one superficial problem and 'solves' it and thinks it should do the trick? (Which is sometimes true, but he often doesn't investigate the problem enough to get at the superficial problem that's actually holding me back.)

My annoyance with his lack of Fe? I would prefer it if he argued from our relationship or his own wants and needs. "I just really want you to come to bed with me. Could you do the dishwasher trick tomorrow?" "Aww, sure." Instead it's 'not about feelings, but about logic!' which I'd accept if he actually gave me a logical story, but he doesn't.

Some other function-related clash?
Some stupid but not function-related habit?

It seems so natural to him that I can't imagine it's not a personality type thing.

We're both loving, generous and reasonably intelligent people, and it's not about either of us not wanting the other to be happy. It's just that the way the other tries to make us happy sometimes feels really depressing.

I don't see logic in his arguments. I see hunches. Like he knows that the chances are nothing bad will happen if you don't follow the manufacturers recommendations to a T. With the dishwasher example, I'll assume it's like my washer, it says there are 2 minutes left, but it might really take 15 until it decides things are clean enough.

His responses are typical of how I react to Js who I feel have gotten too bogged down in the details. He may be a P

 

[March]

Hmm, interesting about the P-ness. Thanks @NeedsNewNameNow!

And true about the dishwasher, there's really no way to know when the d*mnfool thing will be done. Also true about the bike, which is why I won't mind leaving the chain lube at home if we can't bring it. But I don't see why I should give up on the idea before we even try.

Thing is, he's normally J to the max. That's why I find these little tiffs so infuriating (and what makes the 'hunches' sound self-serving) - HE's the one who oils his chain every 500km on the dot, even though he has a gadget that's supposed to make that unnecessary. HE's the one who insists on the dishes being done to a certain standard. (He's the one that suggested we make a what-to-take list in the first place. ) And all of these things are fine with me, and I don't mind accomodating them, but I do kinda want the same leeway when I happen to want something sometime.

 

[NeedsNewNameNow]

Hmm, interesting about the P-ness. Thanks @NeedsNewNameNow!

And true about the dishwasher, there's really no way to know when the d*mnfool thing will be done. Also true about the bike, which is why I won't mind leaving the chain lube at home if we can't bring it. But I don't see why I should give up on the idea before we even try.

Thing is, he's normally J to the max. That's why I find these little tiffs so infuriating (and what makes the 'hunches' sound self-serving) - HE's the one who oils his chain every 500km on the dot, even though he has a gadget that's supposed to make that unnecessary. HE's the one who insists on the dishes being done to a certain standard. (He's the one that suggested we make a what-to-take list in the first place. ) And all of these things are fine with me, and I don't mind accomodating them, but I do kinda want the same leeway when I happen to want something sometime.

I see, so the fact that he isn't living up to his normal standard is what causes you to think he wants something else?
Yet, he doesn't sound forceful about it, what happens if you say, 'well I really want this'? Is there a negotiation process?

 

[lukmor]

Why are you even asking what he wants you to do? He just gives you the facts, maybe he's waiting for you to make up your own mind according to the facts and your subjective needs. After all, if there is one best way to solve the current issue, you shouldn't take what he wants into account, you should do it that way no matter what his opinion is. So maybe he thought it would be superfluous to give it anyway. And maybe he also wants you to come to your own conclusion, after all, it is your business how you do your things.

 

[March]

@NeedsNewNameNow, basically yes. It's more like him to urge me to take good care of my possessions (so to be in favour of bringing tools/improving dishwashing protocol) than it is to take a bet on nothing going wrong.

Negotiating - 'Well, I really want it' can work sometimes, although it kind of stresses him out. And then he often wants to know why, and even if he says he just wants to know we're off into 'reasons A, B and C' 'refutation A, B and C' 'also, reason D' 'also, refutation D' 'also, you said it was just for your info and it's not the whole story' 'well, if there's more to the story you should've said that too!' land.

 

[March]

@lukmor

He's not really giving me 'the facts' - he's giving me A fact. A random fact, from my perspective.

The thing is, I HAD made up my mind. I was going to bring the chain lube unless it didn't fit, and I was going to wait for the dishwasher unless it took longer than 10 minutes. And he only gave me 'the facts' after he had heard that I had already made up my mind.

To me, that implies that he thinks the fact is something that will unmake my mind. Otherwise, why say it?

Also why would this stop after only one iteration? There's many more facts with the same level of relevance as the first one, and I'd hate to have to reinforce that I made up my mind every time someone reads out loud the next entry in the list of tangentially related facts. To me, it makes sense to only bring up facts that could actually cause problems.

And I don't believe he thinks it's my own business how I do my things. Not in this case. Because when he doesn't have a stake in the game, he doesn't interpose random facts. And if I say "I know/Thanks for letting me know. I'm going to do it the way I decided anyway" it wouldn't stress him out that much.

 

[Bumblyjack]

This just drives me batty. I know my 'So you want me to X?' response isn't the most elegant ever, but it's the best I can manage given what's really going through my head.

("Aargh, if you want something ASK IT. Coward! I'm happy to give up something I want if that makes you happy, but at least give me the chance to feel good about myself doing so!")
("So not only do you want me to drop whatever I want in favour of what YOU want, you want me to decide it on my own so you don't have to feel 'bad' for keeping me from something I want?")
("I am AWARE of your random fact, mister! And you know what? It's random and irrelevant and I've thought about the weight I need to give it already! So stuff it.")
("How about you listen to what I want and WHY I WANT IT, and then try to persuade me using arguments that actually matter instead of just dropping in something random and wanting me to be all magically swayed by it.")
("Aargh! You're distracting me with a fact that's not even relevant to YOU! You don't care what I take with me on holiday! I have 'books and notepads' on the list, for crying out loud! Things that are both useless to you and likely to lead to me not paying you attention all the time. And you believe in religiously oiling your chain even though you have an automatic chain lubricator on your bike! So it's probably something about not wanting to risk the oil can to leak all over our luggage. Which is a GREAT reason! But you don't say THAT now, do you?")
("Sure, that's a really nice frame job you're attempting there. You're casting me as 'the one who wants something' and yourself as 'the voice of reason' while deftly sidestepping the facts that you also want something and that I also have logical reasons. I'm not buying it, m'dear.")

So, what do you think is going on here?
His Te vs my Ti? I have a lovely little interconnected network of reasons, and he sees one superficial problem and 'solves' it and thinks it should do the trick? (Which is sometimes true, but he often doesn't investigate the problem enough to get at the superficial problem that's actually holding me back.)

My annoyance with his lack of Fe? I would prefer it if he argued from our relationship or his own wants and needs. "I just really want you to come to bed with me. Could you do the dishwasher trick tomorrow?" "Aww, sure." Instead it's 'not about feelings, but about logic!' which I'd accept if he actually gave me a logical story, but he doesn't.

Here's what it looks like to me:

1. He thinks you are asking for practical advice. He responds with relevant facts that might help you make your decision. He didn't realize that you've already made you're decision and you're just telling him what it is.

2. You take his comment as him asking you to do things his way. You respond by asking what he wants.

3. He is puzzled by this. He thought you were asking for his advice or a recommendation, not for what he wants you to do.

4. You get annoyed because it feels like he's trying to impose his will in a cowardly and manipulative way.

5. He still thinks you were asking for advice.





Coming from a Te perspective, I'll share my thoughts on these examples:


You: I have a mind to take the chain lube. We'll be driving over 1000 km, and they say to lube the chain every 500 or so. If the can won't fit in the luggage, I don't mind leaving it at home, but put it on the list for now, OK?

My thoughts: Why would you want to bring the chain lube? We won't need it during the trip, it won't make any difference despite what "they say".

You: So you want me to leave it at home?

My thoughts: Wait, what I want? I thought you were asking for my advice. I don't really care whether we bring it or not, I just don't see any reason why we would need it.




You: Yes. I want to give it 10 more minutes (for the dishwasher to finish).

My thoughts: It won't be done in 10 minutes, do you want to wait longer than that or not?

You: So you want me to not wait and come to bed with you?

My thoughts: Want? I don't want anything. I'm just saying that it'll very likely be more than 10 minutes. Do you want to wait that long?

So, what do you think is going on here?
His Te vs my Ti? I have a lovely little interconnected network of reasons, and he sees one superficial problem and 'solves' it and thinks it should do the trick? (Which is sometimes true, but he often doesn't investigate the problem enough to get at the superficial problem that's actually holding me back.)

My annoyance with his lack of Fe? I would prefer it if he argued from our relationship or his own wants and needs. "I just really want you to come to bed with me. Could you do the dishwasher trick tomorrow?" "Aww, sure." Instead it's 'not about feelings, but about logic!' which I'd accept if he actually gave me a logical story, but he doesn't.

It seems like Ti/Te miscommunication (with Fe in there too). He seems to think that you are trying to talk through the information and make a decision together. He is unaware that you've already made your decisions and are just telling him what they are. You seem to think that he wants you to compromise for him. That's not what he wants and he has no idea that this is your interpretation of his behavior. Both of you are misunderstanding the other.

 

[Bumblyjack]

The thing is, I HAD made up my mind. I was going to bring the chain lube unless it didn't fit, and I was going to wait for the dishwasher unless it took longer than 10 minutes. And he only gave me 'the facts' after he had heard that I had already made up my mind.

The thing is, he has no idea that you had made up your mind. I'm a Te type and it doesn't seem like it to me either. Based solely on what you said, it looks like you're asking for a recommendation or advice. It seems like you haven't made a decision yet and that you want to discuss options and make the decision with him.

 

[JungyesMBTIno]

His responses are typical of how I react to Js who I feel have gotten too bogged down in the details. He may be a P

What do P and J have to do with details? You're probably thinking of Te trying to externally support logic, which sounds like her husband.

 

[lukmor]

They don't seem so random to me. In the first example, he said that there will really be no harm to the motorcycle if it didn't get lube. Seeing as this was the only reason why you wanted to take the lube, all the reasons for taking it got moot, but all the reasons against taking it remained.
In the second example, the reason that it could take long was the only reason against waiting there was, so again not random.
I don't of course know about his motivations, but it is not obvious if he has a stake in the game. Maybe he just wants the problem to be solved properly and is somewhat disturbed by the fact that you would decide randomly without giving any reasons.
Whether you have already made up your mind or not shouldn't really change anything about reality and what is logical or illogical to do.

 

[snail]

Okay, that should've gotten people's attention. Of course I enjoy being convinced by a good and reasoned argument. What I mean in this case is people throwing in a (to me, random or irrelevant) fact and then hoping you'll change your mind.

Can anyone shed some light on that dynamic?

(Husband (don't know type, something with a strong Te and probably some Si/Ne, but neither ESTJ nor ISTJ profiles sound right - tested ENTJ once but doesn't resonate with Ni at all) and I (INFJ) are making list of stuff to take on motorcycle holiday next week.)
Me: I have a mind to take the chain lube. We'll be driving over 1000 km, and they say to lube the chain every 500 or so. If the can won't fit in the luggage, I don't mind leaving it at home, but put it on the list for now, OK?
Husband: Your motorcycle won't break down if you don't oil it during the holiday.
Me: So you want me to leave it at home?
Husband: Actually, yes.

Or:

(I'm waiting for the dishwasher to finish before going to bed.)
Husband: Do you want to wait up for the dishwasher?
Me: Yes. I want to give it 10 more minutes.
Husband: It can take a long time, you know!
Me: So you want me to not wait and come to bed with you?
Husband: Actually, yes.

This just drives me batty. I know my 'So you want me to X?' response isn't the most elegant ever, but it's the best I can manage given what's really going through my head.

("Aargh, if you want something ASK IT. Coward! I'm happy to give up something I want if that makes you happy, but at least give me the chance to feel good about myself doing so!")
("So not only do you want me to drop whatever I want in favour of what YOU want, you want me to decide it on my own so you don't have to feel 'bad' for keeping me from something I want?")
("I am AWARE of your random fact, mister! And you know what? It's random and irrelevant and I've thought about the weight I need to give it already! So stuff it.")
("How about you listen to what I want and WHY I WANT IT, and then try to persuade me using arguments that actually matter instead of just dropping in something random and wanting me to be all magically swayed by it.")
("Aargh! You're distracting me with a fact that's not even relevant to YOU! You don't care what I take with me on holiday! I have 'books and notepads' on the list, for crying out loud! Things that are both useless to you and likely to lead to me not paying you attention all the time. And you believe in religiously oiling your chain even though you have an automatic chain lubricator on your bike! So it's probably something about not wanting to risk the oil can to leak all over our luggage. Which is a GREAT reason! But you don't say THAT now, do you?")
("Sure, that's a really nice frame job you're attempting there. You're casting me as 'the one who wants something' and yourself as 'the voice of reason' while deftly sidestepping the facts that you also want something and that I also have logical reasons. I'm not buying it, m'dear.")

I know that the things going through my head are my own interpretation and not at all charitable. (I have something of a hair trigger when it comes to people telling me I'm not allowed to want what I want. Bad parents. My annoyance is out of proportion because of that, and also because after 12 years of us being together I still haven't been able to get my husband to understand that I really want him to not assume about what my reasons are, because he usually gets it wrong.) If you think 'Husband's' responses in the above dialogue are perfectly reasonable, could you describe what your thought process is?

(I'm looking for more 'calm yourself down, March!' arguments in my arsenal, and my Ni thrives on alternative perspectives to try on for size.)

He says his reasoning is something like:
" 1) Ah, she wants to bring the chain lube. 2) That HAS to be because she's afraid something bad will happen! 3) I don't want her to bring the chain lube, 4) so if I put her at ease, she'll no longer want to so something I don't like."

1) Sure.
2) You can't say that, really. Doesn't follow at all. Could be this reason, could be any other reason, and unless you KNOW, it's wise not to assume a) that there's only one reason and b) that just happens to be the first reason that pops into YOUR head.
3) That's fine. People want things all the time. No problem. And I like giving him what he wants.
4) Here's where I go haywire. The combination of not being direct about his wants AND trying to manipulate me based on crappy, superficial and WRONG information is just toxic to my poor brain cells. (Especially because occasionally I'll tell him off for assuming there's only one reason and he'll retort "But you didn't tell me ALL your reasons, now did you! How am I supposed to know?" even when I haven't even started telling him any of my reasons.)

So, what do you think is going on here?
His Te vs my Ti? I have a lovely little interconnected network of reasons, and he sees one superficial problem and 'solves' it and thinks it should do the trick? (Which is sometimes true, but he often doesn't investigate the problem enough to get at the superficial problem that's actually holding me back.)

My annoyance with his lack of Fe? I would prefer it if he argued from our relationship or his own wants and needs. "I just really want you to come to bed with me. Could you do the dishwasher trick tomorrow?" "Aww, sure." Instead it's 'not about feelings, but about logic!' which I'd accept if he actually gave me a logical story, but he doesn't.

Some other function-related clash?
Some stupid but not function-related habit?

It seems so natural to him that I can't imagine it's not a personality type thing.

We're both loving, generous and reasonably intelligent people, and it's not about either of us not wanting the other to be happy. It's just that the way the other tries to make us happy sometimes feels really depressing.

I prefer his approach to the more demanding approach you want him to apply. It seems less controlling, because he still gives you the option of deciding how you want to act, while gently inserting whatever information he thinks might alter your choice. What he is doing is exactly what I would do, and what I would want someone else to do. What you want seems too harsh and direct for my liking, and would make a person sound bossy. Maybe he just doesn't want to be bossy, and wants to give you more freedom to decide whether or not to comply with his wishes, which he considerately states in a subtle, non-confrontational manner.

 

[March]

@Bumblyjack, thanks for your perspective.

Well, then my question becomes: how do I inform a Te user that something is NOT meant as request for advice? BEFORE he takes it that way?

The chain lube convo had gone like this (paraphrased) earlier.
"I want to bring a sweater. It might be cold."
"I don't want to bring an extra sweater but I'm going to double up on trousers."
"I want a book to read. And a notebook to write in."
"Yeah, couldn't leave home without those, could you!" *nudge*
"I want to bring my phone + charger."
"Good point, I want to bring the camera and we'll need a charger for that as well."
"Right on. And the satnav. Why do all these things have different chargers?" *frustrated sigh*
"I know! And we need the tablet. With ITS charger." *laughs"
"And I want to bring the chain lube. Bad terrain, high mileage."
"You won't need it."

So there was plenty of acceptance of rhetorical questions and explanations of why and bringing of things that are useless to the other. It was just a listing of things to take, not a negotiation about things to take or a 'help me decide what things to take.' He unilaterally changed the cadence of the convo by suddenly interpreting my 'want' as 'request for advice.' If that's his prerogative, how can I ever prevent getting the Te treatment? Especially since in the chain lube scenario, HE's usually the one doing things according to what 'they say' and he's making an exception this time?

And why would you ask 'Why would you do X' right AFTER someone has told you 'I want to do X because of reasons'? I can imagine 'I want to do X' 'Why?' 'Because of reasons' but the other way around is just asking someone to repeat themselves.

In the dishwasher scenario, you might GUESS it'll take longer than 10 minutes, but your guess would be as good as mine, and therefore no more important than mine. (I was right, BTW - done within 10 minutes.)

Same goes for @lukmor. Can you tell me what makes it seem undecided?

To me, the analysis is thus:
Me: I have a mind to take the chain lube. Statement of want. We'll be driving over 1000 km, and they say to lube the chain every 500 or so. Statement of fact; used to support statement of want. If the can won't fit in the luggage, I don't mind leaving it at home Statement of flexibilty, rebuttal to his mumbled 'we already have a big list of stuff!', but put it on the list for now, OK? Request to write it down (since he was writing), with the stipulation that I'd be happy to cross it out if it turned out there was no room. Not request for advice.

Where does the 'please help me' vibe live? In the 'for now' and the 'OK?' Just because I ask people to write for me instead of ordering them, doesn't mean I need advice in what I want them to write.

 

[NeedsNewNameNow]

What do P and J have to do with details? You're probably thinking of Te trying to externally support logic, which sounds like her husband.

I agree he sounds Te in her follow-up posts.

The initial post reminded me of how my Ne responds to strong Si-- "it doesn't have to be done that way"

 

[Stelmaria]

This is interesting, because if you feel someone should be more direct, but aren't willing to tell them that directly...

 

[March]

Oh no, more responses! Thanks, guys.

@lukmor - is there no difference for you between 'this is the only reason March wants to do something' and 'this is the only reason March has mentioned so far for wanting to do something, but knowing her there are probably others and I shouldn't assume'?

That's the same reasoning my husband often uses - like I'm supposed to exhaustively list all the things that play into why I want something. (I'm a Ti type - if I have to list every reason for something I'm going to have to go back to my childhood and before! "Well, it all started four generations ago when my great-grandmother from my father's side had to give up her dream to have a dairy goat farm...") If it's okay in his mind for me to make my own decisions, why not trust that I have my reasons? Also, he doesn't give ME a laundry list of whyever HE wants something, he just says he wants to and does it.

@snail

Thanks. You're Fi dom, right? I can take that approach better from Fi-doms. Mostly because the ones I know will tell me "Here's a fact. But I don't want you to change your mind just for me!" Or they're better at picking up when I'm stressed out by a Te approach like that.

To me, having the information that's necessary to weigh my choices is giving me the freedom I need - If choice A is a little more time effective but it will stress out my husband, and choice B takes more time but will NOT stress him out, that's relevant information. If I have a strong preference for the stressful option I can make sure to be aware of the effects that choice has on him (and maybe give him more time alone in the evening, or whatever). If I don't care either way, I of course want to choose the less stressful option.

What he does feels to me like allowing me to walk into an ambush. I want something --> He knows it'll have some adverse effect on him --> He'll Te me by giving me a fact not related to the emotional impact --> I'll dismiss his fact because I have already thought about it or think about it right there but am not convinced (Unless, of course, he gives me a great fact and I do change my mind, but that's not what my scenarios are, 'cause then there's no problem) --> I make a choice that hurts him --> He gets angry or depressed because I hurt him and blames me for it, while I had no idea I was about to!

 

[snail]

Oh no, more responses! Thanks, guys.

@lukmor - is there no difference for you between 'this is the only reason March wants to do something' and 'this is the only reason March has mentioned so far for wanting to do something, but knowing her there are probably others and I shouldn't assume'?

That's the same reasoning my husband often uses - like I'm supposed to exhaustively list all the things that play into why I want something. (I'm a Ti type - if I have to list every reason for something I'm going to have to go back to my childhood and before! "Well, it all started four generations ago when my great-grandmother from my father's side had to give up her dream to have a dairy goat farm...") If it's okay in his mind for me to make my own decisions, why not trust that I have my reasons? Also, he doesn't give ME a laundry list of whyever HE wants something, he just says he wants to and does it.

@snail

Thanks. You're Fi dom, right? I can take that approach better from Fi-doms. Mostly because the ones I know will tell me "Here's a fact. But I don't want you to change your mind just for me!" Or they're better at picking up when I'm stressed out by a Te approach like that.

To me, having the information that's necessary to weigh my choices is giving me the freedom I need - If choice A is a little more time effective but it will stress out my husband, and choice B takes more time but will NOT stress him out, that's relevant information. If I have a strong preference for the stressful option I can make sure to be aware of the effects that choice has on him (and maybe give him more time alone in the evening, or whatever). If I don't care either way, I of course want to choose the less stressful option.

What he does feels to me like allowing me to walk into an ambush. I want something --> He knows it'll have some adverse effect on him --> He'll Te me by giving me a fact not related to the emotional impact --> I'll dismiss his fact because I have already thought about it or think about it right there but am not convinced (Unless, of course, he gives me a great fact and I do change my mind, but that's not what my scenarios are, 'cause then there's no problem) --> I make a choice that hurts him --> He gets angry or depressed because I hurt him and blames me for it, while I had no idea I was about to!

Ah, yes, that is a different sort of situation. I have been with someone who didn't make his opinions known, who then got upset with me for doing things unreasonably. I felt like he was sometimes setting traps for me to fall into just so he would have an excuse to say mean things to me afterward.

I would like to clarify that it is only good for a person to be indirect when s/he is not going to hold a grudge against you for not doing what s/he wanted.

 

[lukmor]

In the dishwasher scenario, there was no request for advice. Maybe it was unnecessary for him to have commented on it, but if he was trying to get you to come to bed earlier, that's where he had to start, by giving reasons why you could be waiting longer, because if it took just 5 minutes, it wouldn't be justified for him to ask you that you come right along, the reasons why he wanted you to come and whether he was too shy to state them explicitly don't really change that, even though he could have.
In the lube scenario, you said that you would be willing to not take it after all, so why write it down and then change it, when you could deal with that right away, if he thought he had arguments strong enough to show it shouldn't be taken even if it fits. You didn't explicitly say you wanted advice, but why wouldn't you? It doesn't hurt, it can only help.

 

[March]

@Snow Leopard, how'd you figure that? Because I list only 2 scenarios and not our entire 12 year relationship?

I've tried all the permutations I can think of to tell him "honey, if you want me to do something for you, I'd be pleased as punch to do it, but I really would like you to ask. I love giving you what I want, and I love hearing that you want me."

If I just say it at a non-relevant time, he'll go 'OK sure,' and forget. If I say it when I'm quite sure he's implying something, it pisses him off and we have a BIG fight on our hands.

Which is why my second line of attack to disarm this painful process is to change myself. One of the myriad ways in which I'm trying to do that is to ask you personality type afficionados for your reasoning - "if you're in a conversation with a person you love and whom you know is hella intelligent and you're not stressed out or pissed off or nursing a grudge at hir, what positive/well-intentioned things would be going through your mind if you were to say these things?"

 

[March]

@lukmor,

Ah, thanks.

Well, he should know by now that 'advice never hurts' doesn't fly between the two of us, because there's a risk of him pissing me off by giving advice I consider irrelevant, and inversely I sometimes piss him off by giving advice he considers patronising.

Your comment is fascinating, so I'm going to take it line by line.

Maybe it was unnecessary for him to have commented on it, but if he was trying to get you to come to bed earlier, that's where he had to start

I don't see that. How about "Boy, I really wish you'd come to bed with me"?

because if it took just 5 minutes, it wouldn't be justified for him to ask you that you come right along

Where does the time frame for something being justified start? We regularly go to bed late, so even if it took another hour it wouldn't have been out of the ordinary. It's either justified for him to ask at any time, IMO (because we said a vow to take care of each other and all that), or it's never justified (because I can make the choice to sacrifice my night's sleep for something I consider more important any time. Not likely to be the dishwasher, though.)

whether he was too shy to state them explicitly

Hmm. You think shyness is the cause? Because I've seen him shy, and it doesn't look like this! This just sounded like what someone would say if they weren't paying attention to what they were saying. Shyness causes people to pay a LOT of attention to what they're going to say.

In the lube scenario, you said that you would be willing to not take it after all, so why write it down and then change it, when you could deal with that right away

Here's where asking for advice on a message board goes awry. You need background info for this: we just got our motorcycles last autumn, and we don't have a full set of luggage for them yet. We are borrowing my brother's set of luggage, but we won't get them until Thursday. Until then, there's no way I could have 'dealt with that right away.'

I also disagree a little on principle: Why pack your bags a week early just to see whether one thing needs to be left out, if you can just as easily make a note that you're going to pay attention while packing your bags? Making a sublist of 'things I'd like to take but maybe won't' is something we do every time, and it's a lot less work than packing everything and unpacking it again.

if he thought he had arguments strong enough to show it shouldn't be taken even if it fits

But he didn't have those arguments, or at least didn't use them. He only said that he thought it might not be necessary to prevent a breakdown - which I know, because lube is not needed to prevent breakdown but to increase longevity. And it's also not the case that he doesn't believe that lube increases longevity, since he uses it regularly himself.

I agree with you on principle here, though - no need to keep something on the 'maybe' list if you're already sure it's a 'no'. However, 'I say so' isn't a reason.