Personality Cafe banner
21 - 40 of 96 Posts
The idea that there is an ideal match, whether personality type related or not, is a dangerous fairy tale - and normally I'm one who's all for fairtyals and ideals and chasing dreams. Thinking that there will ever be a 'perfect' relationship that doesn't require work and personal sacrifice is... not understanding LOVE. Love isn't focused on its own desires and comfort - which is what keeping your eye out for a 'more perfect match' is - it's looking out for yourself. Of course some relationships are easier than others, but whenever there are two Different people, you're going to come across places where you clash, and a good relationship is working together through those clashes and Knowing how to Put the Other Person's Needs Before Your Own while still balancing this with Self-Care and Self-Respect.

Personality theories Can give us general insights into probable issues that Could arise between people of certain types, or help us analyze issues that have arisen and help us understand each other's perspectives, but there are so many factors beyond personality that affect relationships between people that it is silly to think it can determine who is best for you specifically.

Whenever looking at personality theories, whether you are considering it in regards to relationships or just personal understanding, it's important to give more weight to your actual, individual, personal experience rather than just taking everything as 'it must be true' and then viewing your life only through an interpretation that matches that. (I mean this is true of anytihng you read).
 
Discussion starter · #22 · (Edited)
I think it would be unwise to follow MBTI or personality descriptions, find value in it, and then not use it to qualify people who you might enter into a relationship with. If there's truth in the personality types - and there is definite truth there, because it's a pattern of behavior - then you can avoid certain behaviors, period. It's very simple in this way.

As an introvert, all the extroverts qualifying others based on a wide range of superficial values, I'm glad that I have a tool to counter all that and say that they disqualify due to valuing many of those superficial values.
I don’t think you read through the scenarios I wrote.

This seems quite prejudiced and also incorrect. MBTI is Cognitive function, not exactly behavior. Two people of very different types can both act the same in a situation and people of the same type can act very differently. Specific values certainly aren’t MBTI-related. Much more culture-based and family-based and really probably individual-based. For instance, two people of two very different types can both highly value kindness, for instance OR two people of the same type can value kindness very differently.

Could you please try to explain your statement from above: “Extroverts qualify others based on a wide range of superficial values” ?
 
I don’t think you read through the scenarios I wrote.
I did, but that's beside the point I am making, which is counter to your premise. I think "ideal matching" has a lot of value and not much harm.

This seems quite prejudiced and also incorrect.
Prejudice comes from a place of truth.

Darn, missed your INFJ-specifics there before you edited it out. Yes, everyone is different.

MBTI is Cognitive function, not exactly behavior.
There is correlation though. That's my point. And it's pretty definitive that many behaviors do apply to the vast majority of any specific type.

Could you please try to explain your statement from above: “Extroverts qualify others based on a wide range of superficial values” ?
I'd have to point to some examples. One that I've been following recently has been ENTP-related. ENTP seem to also score similarly in enneagram with 7 being a dominant score. This type likes to try new things, and has a personality that is quick to start but then quickly moves on to something new; gets bored easily and doesn't like to be held down to things. In relationships, this can mean a lot of different partners - whomever suited their fancy at the time. The connection wasn't something about the personality of their partner, it was more about what they could enjoy in the short time frame before they moved on - superficial things in general. Attempting to explore the depths of a person isn't a common trait for this type unless they really connect or grow out of that nature.

And, I'm not saying just MBTI, but personality metrics of all sorts are applicable for filtering out potential problems.

For example, I find it a turn off when someone has a lot of sexual partners. It's a huge turn off; I want a deep connection, not just "the next" connection. If ENTPs on average are seeking out lots of relationships and having lots of sexual partners to try new things and be their extroverted selves (which I have no problem with, each type is different) I can basically not waste my time; if I know someone is an ENTP, in general, their method of always wanting to try new things, if it extends to relationships, is not going to sit well with me. I can just avoid that problem - on average - by not considering ENTPs for a relationship. I save myself a lot of inner turmoil trying to make sense of how their world works, and I save them a lot of turmoil trying to understand why I even care and if they should leave me or not over it.

It's a win-win situation here. It's just one example, but there are many others, for many different types.

If you know how a certain type works in general, you can avoid dealing with that. INFP for example like being told what to do. They just want someone to say "go do this thing" and they go do this thing. If you don't want to engage with someone in that manner in a relationship, then you can avoid this type. This is a broad generality and someone might say they're different; not the point. Another easy to apply example: let's say you'd rather be spending time with someone who enjoys the moment with you versus always taking photographs of the moment - INFP are the ones taking the photograph of the sunset (or lots of other things) instead of simply enjoying it with their partner on average. It's a trend among the type to do this. It's not bad, not at all, but if you want to avoid feeling like a secondary priority to the act of capturing the perfect picture that captures the feeling they are getting when they see something - which is super powerful and important to them - well, just don't involve yourself with INFPs. If you don't mind someone snapping photos all the time, then it's not a big deal, and you can in effect choose to deal with it or not in this way.

It's about being able to pick the things that might line up with your values, easier. If a certain type prioritizes certain things and you do not, it's a conflict you can avoid.

Highly sensory-experience types conflict with my inferior Se. So hanging out with a type that generally is into high-volume sensory experiences, I can avoid that and look for people who also share this, or balance me out in a different way. I get along really well with INTJs as long as nothing emotional is discussed, since we like to do the same dominant thing, and avoid the same inferior thing. This seems pretty good, and the problems we might face in a relationship are probably more to my liking.

This probably is more work than most people are willing to put into things, so it's not for everyone. ENTP for example couldn't be bothered to consider these things for the most part. They'll just try different things until they've found something they really like. But for those who think there's some value in not wasting their time, why not filter based on an ideal type or close to it? If your ideal Friday night is to go out to a club and dance and drink and get drunk, that's not representative of a lot of types in terms of their sensory function. Everyone is different, but it will help you avoid things that might conflict with who you are if you pay attention.

Want to get analyzed and inspected and have someone poke at your inner self? Find an INFJ - their Ni/Ti generally makes them really dig into who you are. Want to not have someone so concerned with these things? Find some other type.

When you browse these forums, you see a lot of patterns in types. Thousands of people who agree with the same thing, and express a feeling of belonging when someone of their same type "gets them." (note, very little extroverted activity relative to introverted) Extending this pattern to relationships and anywhere else makes a lot of sense. If you want someone to start off a project the right way, get an ENTP, but don't keep them on the project for too long or they will get bored. So it can apply to work relationships as well; an older family member who was in high ranking government positions took MBTI a long time ago and his position was redirected towards his interests from that. Like a long time ago. And he loved it (and is ENTP). So the value in doing this kind of filtering and prioritizing is there. It's just learning how to use it, and obviously not treating people poorly or just completely discounting everyone simply because - which is where there can be harm. Instead, if I know a specific type is unlikely to align with my values, maybe they just stay friends. No harm in that.
 
Discussion starter · #24 ·
I did, but that's beside the point I am making, which is counter to your premise. I think "ideal matching" has a lot of value and not much harm.



Prejudice comes from a place of truth.

Darn, missed your INFJ-specifics there before you edited it out. Yes, everyone is different.



There is correlation though. That's my point. And it's pretty definitive that many behaviors do apply to the vast majority of any specific type.



I'd have to point to some examples. One that I've been following recently has been ENTP-related. ENTP seem to also score similarly in enneagram with 7 being a dominant score. This type likes to try new things, and has a personality that is quick to start but then quickly moves on to something new; gets bored easily and doesn't like to be held down to things. In relationships, this can mean a lot of different partners - whomever suited their fancy at the time. The connection wasn't something about the personality of their partner, it was more about what they could enjoy in the short time frame before they moved on - superficial things in general. Attempting to explore the depths of a person isn't a common trait for this type unless they really connect or grow out of that nature.

And, I'm not saying just MBTI, but personality metrics of all sorts are applicable for filtering out potential problems.

For example, I find it a turn off when someone has a lot of sexual partners. It's a huge turn off; I want a deep connection, not just "the next" connection. If ENTPs on average are seeking out lots of relationships and having lots of sexual partners to try new things and be their extroverted selves (which I have no problem with, each type is different) I can basically not waste my time; if I know someone is an ENTP, in general, their method of always wanting to try new things, if it extends to relationships, is not going to sit well with me. I can just avoid that problem - on average - by not considering ENTPs for a relationship. I save myself a lot of inner turmoil trying to make sense of how their world works, and I save them a lot of turmoil trying to understand why I even care and if they should leave me or not over it.

It's a win-win situation here. It's just one example, but there are many others, for many different types.

If you know how a certain type works in general, you can avoid dealing with that. INFP for example like being told what to do. They just want someone to say "go do this thing" and they go do this thing. If you don't want to engage with someone in that manner in a relationship, then you can avoid this type. This is a broad generality and someone might say they're different; not the point. Another easy to apply example: let's say you'd rather be spending time with someone who enjoys the moment with you versus always taking photographs of the moment - INFP are the ones taking the photograph of the sunset (or lots of other things) instead of simply enjoying it with their partner on average. It's a trend among the type to do this. It's not bad, not at all, but if you want to avoid feeling like a secondary priority to the act of capturing the perfect picture that captures the feeling they are getting when they see something - which is super powerful and important to them - well, just don't involve yourself with INFPs. If you don't mind someone snapping photos all the time, then it's not a big deal, and you can in effect choose to deal with it or not in this way.

It's about being able to pick the things that might line up with your values, easier. If a certain type prioritizes certain things and you do not, it's a conflict you can avoid.

Highly sensory-experience types conflict with my inferior Se. So hanging out with a type that generally is into high-volume sensory experiences, I can avoid that and look for people who also share this, or balance me out in a different way. I get along really well with INTJs as long as nothing emotional is discussed, since we like to do the same dominant thing, and avoid the same inferior thing. This seems pretty good, and the problems we might face in a relationship are probably more to my liking.

This probably is more work than most people are willing to put into things, so it's not for everyone. ENTP for example couldn't be bothered to consider these things for the most part. They'll just try different things until they've found something they really like. But for those who think there's some value in not wasting their time, why not filter based on an ideal type or close to it? If your ideal Friday night is to go out to a club and dance and drink and get drunk, that's not representative of a lot of types in terms of their sensory function. Everyone is different, but it will help you avoid things that might conflict with who you are if you pay attention.

Want to get analyzed and inspected and have someone poke at your inner self? Find an INFJ - their Ni/Ti generally makes them really dig into who you are. Want to not have someone so concerned with these things? Find some other type.

When you browse these forums, you see a lot of patterns in types. Thousands of people who agree with the same thing, and express a feeling of belonging when someone of their same type "gets them." (note, very little extroverted activity relative to introverted) Extending this pattern to relationships and anywhere else makes a lot of sense. If you want someone to start off a project the right way, get an ENTP, but don't keep them on the project for too long or they will get bored. So it can apply to work relationships as well; an older family member who was in high ranking government positions took MBTI a long time ago and his position was redirected towards his interests from that. Like a long time ago. And he loved it (and is ENTP). So the value in doing this kind of filtering and prioritizing is there. It's just learning how to use it, and obviously not treating people poorly or just completely discounting everyone simply because - which is where there can be harm. Instead, if I know a specific type is unlikely to align with my values, maybe they just stay friends. No harm in that.
I guess I’ve said it before to you. You think you know, and you don’t. Your thoughts on INFPs are so off as to make me think you’ve never met one. And you’re scattering your prejudiced ideas around where I can see the possible damage.

I think you better be my second “ignore.”
 
Vexus said:
If you know how a certain type works in general, you can avoid dealing with that. INFP for example like being told what to do. They just want someone to say "go do this thing" and they go do this thing. If you don't want to engage with someone in that manner in a relationship, then you can avoid this type.
What can one say to such nonsense? INFPs, of all people, are supposed to wait for orders? That is as absurd as the assumption that INTPs wait for orders. Even more absurd is the assumption that the two most independent (I+N+P) of the 16 types are thirsting to execute any commands.

Another easy to apply example: let's say you'd rather be spending time with someone who enjoys the moment with you versus always taking photographs of the moment - INFP are the ones taking the photograph of the sunset (or lots of other things) instead of simply enjoying it with their partner on average. It's a trend among the type to do this. It's not bad, not at all, but if you want to avoid feeling like a secondary priority to the act of capturing the perfect picture that captures the feeling they are getting when they see something - which is super powerful and important to them - well, just don't involve yourself with INFPs. If you don't mind someone snapping photos all the time, then it's not a big deal, and you can in effect choose to deal with it or not in this way.
That is completely new to me. Which study are you referring to? What do you think these infamous INFP photographers were thinking? Perhaps "She is not as deep deep deep as she always claims, just a teacher without an audience?" Do these INFP photos of sunsets and leftovers on plates bear witness to suicidal INFP desperation, and will they most likely be used against them at the next opportunity to prove how shallow they are?

If you need advice on the most convenient way to protect yourself from kissing a kissable ENTP surface without being married for at least 25 years after that first kiss, you should always present yourself from the very beginning as the GRANDMOTHER type (like GRAND TOUR and GRAND HOTEL). ENTPs will know what to do right away. Unless they have a soft spot for GRANDMILFs, of course.
 
If ENTPs on average are seeking out lots of relationships and having lots of sexual partners to try new things and be their extroverted selves (which I have no problem with, each type is different) I can basically not waste my time;
If I know someone is an ENTP, in general, their method of always wanting to try new things, if it extends to relationships, is not going to sit well with me. I can just avoid that problem - on average - by not considering ENTPs for a relationship.
I must be the most atypical ENTP on the planet!
Sexual lifestyle? Highly sexual and playing the field? Not me at all.
Relationships? I have high awareness of, and are, totally committed to my partner - what's good for us both is my approach to love.

It's obvious your interpretation of ENTP's and other types is based on excessive stereotyping.
Most people sit in the 'middle' of their type expressions rather than at the extreme boundaries.
 
Discussion starter · #27 ·
I must be the most atypical ENTP on the planet!
Sexual lifestyle? Highly sexual and playing the field? Not me at all.
Relationships? I have high awareness of, and are, totally committed to my partner - what's good for us both is my approach to love.

It's obvious your interpretation of ENTP's and other types is based on excessive stereotyping.
Most people sit in the 'middle' of their type expressions rather than at the extreme boundaries.
I meant to defend ENTPs by summoning some of you because I hardly knew where to start unpicking the elaborate mis-information and prejudice. Glad you’re here.

I’m really not going to put up with type prejudice anymore. Man have I ever heard the most illogical tripe about extroverts at times on PerC. Stuff that makes no sense at all. So interesting and shows such lack of awareness, but no more. I don’t think we should put up with it. Thank you for speaking out.
 
It's obvious your interpretation of ENTP's and other types is based on excessive stereotyping.
That's kind of the point? Your one-off personal self-anecdote about being different is completely irrelevant. It does not make anything obvious.

The point is stereotypes are useful in a broad sense, though not necessary to apply in an individual sense. I can avoid potential issues, for example the way you react, by just... not dealing with your type. I know, on average, other types will dig in to the topic even if it conflicts with their own personal experience.

Edit:
I must be the most atypical ENTP on the planet!
Just look at the forum post distribution and hopefully you can see that yes, you are extremely atypical if you're regularly posting on these forums as an extrovert. If you need concrete proof, do the math on the percentage of introvert posts vs. extrovert posts. And then do your type compared to the whole. It's staggering how much of an outlier any extrovert is if they spend much time here. Which is probably why there is a negative reaction. I don't know for sure, but hopefully the hard math on that will be of some use in making some sense about what I'm saying; there are patterns, and if you want to avoid someone who likes chatting on internet personality forums, avoid introverts!

What can one say to such nonsense? INFPs, of all people, are supposed to wait for orders? That is as absurd as the assumption that INTPs wait for orders. Even more absurd is the assumption that the two most independent (I+N+P) of the 16 types are thirsting to execute any commands.
That wasn't stated, but that doesn't stop people from injecting their own interpretation into things and confusing themselves and others. I don't know where INTPs entered the chat, but whatever, you do you. I'm not saying INFP wait for orders, and did not say they wait for orders, but somehow you're able to generate this claim from within your perception of my words and create a position against an invisible framework which you can then attack. I'm saying they prefer, on average, to have a clear directive so they don't have to use inferior Te too much to think about things; they like being told what to do - not that they wait for orders, but again, prefer situations where they're told what to do. They like situations where the expectation of them is clear, like a workplace where they are told, "This is exactly what needs to be done step by step to do your job." There are always outliers, but inferior Te is the driver behind this if you want to read about it. They are more stressed out when they're not told what to do and have to improvise, fearing making a mistake or not doing the right thing.

I didn't read the rest, it got too scatterbrained. And as always, nothing applies to all. Everyone is different. But if you're needing a think-on-their-feet person as a project-manager who can dynamically manage a bunch of people and change direction on a whim, an INFP might not be fit for that role and would get stressed out. And then, again, there will be one who is just fine at it. That's not the point; the stereotypes have some value as-is.
 
Whoa, easy with the flaming. While I'm happy that the OP is speaking up on behalf of INFPs, I think this is just a case of misinterpretation of @Vexus' statement. As an INFP, let me clarify some points. Hope it could solve some misunderstandings here! :D

INFP for example like being told what to do. They just want someone to say "go do this thing" and they go do this thing.
Just like some people have mentioned, I-N-P combinations most often result in someone who are extremely independent. They definitely do not like being ordered. But when the INFP is confused and they need directions, they would really appreciate it if someone could provide them with some insights, preferably coming from their own personal experience that has been proven to work (this point is not a must). But on a daily basis? I don't think INFP would want to let others to make decisions for them forever.

So, I'd disagree with @Vexus' way of expressing this point, but I get his idea. I don't think he is demeaning INFPs in any way, it's just that the way that it's phrased might have misled people in believing so.

The same goes for his description of other types. I think there's so much underlying information and facts that could have been expressed to avoid this misunderstanding. But if we were to lay out every single one of them each time we want to make a point, imagine how long every posts here would be! I'm sure nobody here would want to read essays everyday.

Anyways, I believe his main point is that certain types do have some tendencies toward certain behaviors. Though it's not always the case, but we can't completely refute that there is indeed a higher chance of that to happen. Of course, there will always be deviations in statistics, but some people might want to play safe and prefer to just stick with the stereotypes, to save time or for whatever reasons.

This is the reason why the Chinese people would rather their kids learn English with a Russian with heavy accent, rather than a Canadian-born Chinese with fluent British accent. Well I'd say, too bad for them, they're missing out. Same for those who choose to stick with the MBTI stereotypes.
 
Discussion starter · #31 ·
Whoa, easy with the flaming. While I'm happy that the OP is speaking up on behalf of INFPs, I think this is just a case of misinterpretation of @Vexus' statement. As an INFP, let me clarify some points. Hope it could solve some misunderstandings here! :D


Just like some people have mentioned, I-N-P combinations most often result in someone who are extremely independent. They definitely do not like being ordered. But when the INFP is confused and they need directions, they would really appreciate it if someone could provide them with some insights, preferably coming from their own personal experience that has been proven to work (this point is not a must). But on a daily basis? I don't think INFP would want to let others to make decisions for them forever.

So, I'd disagree with @Vexus' way of expressing this point, but I get his idea. I don't think he is demeaning INFPs in any way, it's just that the way that it's phrased might have misled people in believing so.

The same goes for his description of other types. I think there's so much underlying information and facts that could have been expressed to avoid this misunderstanding. But if we were to lay out every single one of them each time we want to make a point, imagine how long every posts here would be! I'm sure nobody here would want to read essays everyday.

Anyways, I believe his main point is that certain types do have some tendencies toward certain behaviors. Though it's not always the case, but we can't completely refute that there is indeed a higher chance of that to happen. Of course, there will always be deviations in statistics, but some people might want to play safe and prefer to just stick with the stereotypes, to save time or for whatever reasons.

This is the reason why the Chinese people would rather their kids learn English with a Russian with heavy accent, rather than a Canadian-born Chinese with fluent British accent. Well I'd say, too bad for them, they're missing out. Same for those who choose to stick with the MBTI stereotypes.
So, main point aside (which I disagree with when people don’t understand people well, because then it becomes ridiculous and prejudiced based on nothing), am I supposed to let it slide when someone says something like:
“Extroverts qualify people based on a wide criteria of shallow values.”

Hmm, let’s say that I didn’t read the part where he also disqualified ENTPs from his dating pool with the logic from his above statement and lets say that I decide shallow is a neutral word here, then it’s still really messed up due to not understanding and looking more deeply into someone’s criteria to understand their methods as valuable and understand why their methods work for them and also overcome prejudice.

Basically sometimes people use MBTI for the opposite of what it is meant to be used for. It is using MBTI to dismiss assume and undervalue others rather than used to appreciate and ask deeper questions and hold off on assumptions until you can ask people and understand more.

I’m sick of being dismissed for being an Extrovert myself and I’ve heard the most faulty logic used— not just on this thread— to do so. I have heard such crazy stuff as Extroverts are the ones who will get everyone infected with CoViD. I’ve heard that extroverts (not in this thread) are unintelligent, unthoughtful, etc. Now I hear shallow values? For Ne dom? From a type whose hierarchy of values should be the same as mine? I am just plain sick of the prejudice. I think people need to go back to basics. MBTI practitioners always teach the equality of all of our polarities, and also teach the incorrect assumptions that can arise as incorrect assumptions. I think we need to go back there. A lot of people think they can understand all of this without even a wide sample size of type to study and without really discussing things.

My main problem here is that I can easily see the possible consequences of all this poor information and shut possibilities for ENFPs are the thing we hate the most.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ewok City
Hmm, let’s say that I didn’t read the part where he also disqualified ENTPs from his dating pool with the logic from his above statement and lets say that I decide shallow is a neutral word here, then it’s still really messed up due to not understanding and looking more deeply into someone’s criteria to understand their methods as valuable and understand why their methods work for them and also overcome prejudice.
But me disqualifying ENTPs is not an attack on you, or any ENTP. It's doing us both a favor :LOL:

If I made a claim that all ENTPs are bisexual, who cares? It's not an attack on you unless you take offense to being called bisexual. If it's false as it applies to you, then great. If you think it's false regarding your entire type, then why are you trying to personally defend millions of people? A simple, "I think you're wrong on this, mainly because I'm not this way," is enough. There is no hard evidence of any of this, nor will such evidence likely ever be found, so it's all just opinion. There's a chance I am just shooting myself in the foot; if you care about me and don't want me to suffer, then it makes sense, but if you don't care about me, leave me to my misery of avoiding certain types.

I use type information to better help me relate and understand other people. It has eliminated prejudice and allows me to see where someone is coming from and why they have their perspective, rather than just thinking, "This person is an idiot," which was normal for me beforehand.

At the same time, looking into someone's criteria and methods, if those criteria and methods are generally going to be unfavorable to your own internal values, seems like a waste of time when considering a romantic relationship. Again, on average. Another aspect to this, is even though I can say I will try and filter an ENTP from a relationship, it's very possible that I don't adhere to this; it's not as set in stone as I make it, and I don't think it is for anyone. It's more a guiding idea for saving time, since values will be different, or the methods for dealing with problems will be different, and if those clash with how I deal with things, that kind of problem can be avoided.... on average.

Basically sometimes people use MBTI for the opposite of what it is meant to be used for. It is using MBTI to dismiss assume and undervalue others rather than used to appreciate and ask deeper questions and hold off on assumptions until you can ask people and understand more.
There's someone posting about how they exclusively want to use MBTI to obtain sex. I don't think they're wrong in using MBTI in any way shape or form that they want. "Meant" to be used for is entirely subjective.

I'd definitely ask more in-depth questions to an individual, but I'm not going to look for an ENTP out of the crowd (and to be fair, ENTP aren't the ones I really disqualify, it's more the high extroverted sensors, which I'll link another thread in a moment which is "interesting" (not fact)). So if I meet an ENTP or if one reaches out to me and wants to talk, they're an individual, and worth all my time and effort getting to know them. But if I'm looking for someone, why not avoid the poor odds that certain problems are dealt with in a favorable way?

If you've ever told someone in a relationship, "Look you're too much, you're kind of annoying me right now, I think we need time apart," - if this correlates to a type, it's not a type I would enjoy being with, if that were ever said to me.

I am just plain sick of the prejudice.
And yet, you're in an introverted space when seeing this prejudice, right? This is really interesting. Go on any dating app, and what do you see? Extroverted prejudice based on the sensory world. I initially had the same feeling of being sick of the prejudice - how can I "swipe no" on someone when I don't know who they are? But other types can make that call based on their shallow understanding of someone. And to be fair, any type can and will and so on, but it feels wrong for some reason. So, if my feeling of it being wrong is not just me (as I had always thought) and is instead more aligned with personality, then there are others like me who feel it's wrong, and those people I might get along with better in a relationship. If you think casual sex is fine, and I do not, we're going to have a rift in our relationship, period. And if that extends to types in general, then saving ourselves the headache of the inevitable argument sounds fine to me.

This link below is a thread someone posted, making some completely unscientific claims about types and their willingness to engage in casual sex. I think it's fun to look at because it's in effect a representation of my own intuition. Even if it's wrong or whatever is irrelevant. It has some value to it regardless. And if it has any bearing on anything, ENTP seem alright ;)

 
Question: Do we truly see others as individuals beyond type?
It's a hard question. I can tell that during a few recent years when I've been into typology theories, it started to create some stereotypes for me how I see people. But now when I've decided I initially always mistyped myself, I'm much more sceptical about trying to see their types instead of actual person behind it.

Question: Do we get too mixed up in whatever anyone is saying about ideal pairings?
Since my recent findings I've got about myself, I don't think any more there are ideal pairings but I have my own hypothetical theory but I unfortunately don't have enough facts to back it up. Will try to explain it under question 3.

Question: What have you experienced? What have you seen?
Earlier I saw myself as ENFP and my partner as INFJ and it seemed to work well so I believed there seems to be some truth behind this type match thing. But now I've finally found that we both were most likely mistyped so it doesn't apply any more :) It doesn't of course change anything how we see each other and get along - it just helps to understand each other even better.

My best understanding about myself right now is that I'm some STJ and more likely my current partner is INTJ not INFJ - her feelings and emotions are very inwardly oriented so it's not easy to see them, she couldn't even express them more than I could about my own feelings and her probably very good communication and people skills she has learned with experience, initially misled me to think it's Fe. She works with people but it appeared she just arranges them and solves their issues but isn't actually emotionally involved at all. This combination works well for us and I can see even some similarities with each other considering judgement styles we mostly use. My ex for 15 years was most likely ESFJ and I can now more clearly see reasons behind repeating conflicts we had those times.

I got just a hypothetical thought after those recent revelations - what if perception doesn't play role in a good match but judgement styles do affect it? From my own exp, I had particular troubles with strong Fe (ESFJ) while she sometimes saw me as a cold uncaring bastard - although I'm just bad in providing enough confirmation and affirmation she needed - it's just not my cup of tea. On the other hand I never understood why she needed to become so irrational and emotion-driven while arguing or having a conflict. Seems that judgements/decisions just were too different for us. And right now we don't have any of those issues with my current partner as our judgement styles seem quite similar. Also our need for displaying emotions, speaking nice words and compliments and getting confirmation/affirmation is quite equally low for both of us.

I don't have enough different observations to tell from my own experiences if there's truth behind my hypothesis as I've been in only 2 long relationships for whole recent 20 years but what do you think?
 
While I find it hard to pinpoint one specific factor that draws me to a woman, there are certainly patterns to be found in the kind of people who I've attracted and repelled in the past. I think everyone probably has an archetype that they're looking for in a mate, even if they're not consciously aware of it.

When I think of an "ideal" relationship scenario, I imagine the conversation between Origami Tobiichi and the protagonist Shido early on in the anime Date A Live. While as a fictional character, many of Origami's traits are exaggerated to create a kuudere archetype, I am fascinated by the juxtaposition between her calm and dispassionate demeanor, her brevity in conversations and her rather possessive (and perverted) sexual behaviour. I would love to provoke and coax some amusing response out of a girl like this.


Transcript of the dialogue:

Shido: I watch you all the time during class.

Origami: Me too.

Shido: Not only that, but I also sniff your gym clothes after school.

Origami: Me too.

Shido: R-really...I guess we have a lot in common...

Origami: Yeah.


More mature examples of this type in fiction might be Jill Valentine from Resident Evil, or the goddess Athena from Homer's Odyssey.
 
Discussion starter · #35 ·
Do we wonder why this
While I find it hard to pinpoint one specific factor that draws me to a woman, there are certainly patterns to be found in the kind of people who I've attracted and repelled in the past. I think everyone probably has an archetype that they're looking for in a mate, even if they're not consciously aware of it.

When I think of an "ideal" relationship scenario, I imagine the conversation between Origami Tobiichi and the protagonist Shido early on in the anime Date A Live. While as a fictional character, many of Origami's traits are exaggerated to create a kuudere archetype, I am fascinated by the juxtaposition between her calm and dispassionate demeanor, her brevity in conversations and her rather possessive (and perverted) sexual behaviour. I would love to provoke and coax some amusing response out of a girl like this.


Transcript of the dialogue:

Shido: I watch you all the time during class.

Origami: Me too.

Shido: Not only that, but I also sniff your gym clothes after school.

Origami: Me too.

Shido: R-really...I guess we have a lot in common...

Origami: Yeah.


More mature examples of this type in fiction might be Jill Valentine from Resident Evil, or the goddess Athena from Homer's Odyssey.
Not exactly what this thread is about, but getting some super-specific experiences expectations without much experience of what makes a relationship actually work might not work too well for people either.
 
Question: Do we truly see others as individuals beyond type?

Question: Do we get too mixed up in whatever anyone is saying about ideal pairings?

Question: What have you experienced? What have you seen?
I’ve definitely seen the “There are a million red flags but I’m going to ignore it because our pairing is ideal!”philosophy play out a few times. I don’t know how much MBTI is to blame. While the person is using it as justification, they have seemed like the type to enter red flag relationships anyway…MBTI just happens to be their current justification.

Hypothetical pairings (and especially the data behind the pairings) are fascinating! I don’t think there are enough large studies out there to give super solid data. But the data I have seen doesn’t really back up the ‘golden type’ descriptions.

Putting out my own theories is a bit of a mine field, since there is always someone ready to be offended.🤷‍♀️I know full well it’s based on my own personal experience and observations, but there are patterns out there to be recognized.

As far as my personal experience, my marriage was already in existence and happy before MBTI came out to play. So I’ve been able to use it to flesh out certain thought processes and have a common vocabulary to discuss them. I don’t know how much of a challenge it would have been to do that without a pre-built base.
 
I’m only speaking from an INFP perspective, it may or may not hold true for the other NF types to varying degrees. If it doesn’t then all the better.

This won’t sound the best, but over time I’ve come to realize that despite all the good traits we have / think we have, that the fact is we aren’t exactly sought after as life partners by a majority of the people in this current world. INFP guys pretty much run opposite the stereotype of what the “mainstream” expects out of our gender, and while I’m sure that INFP gals can / are often shy and demure and “feminine” as the mainstream expects, all of it is concealing lots of depth and intensity that will surprise or even put many off once it starts to be revealed.

We aren’t made for this world, whether fully partaking in its joys and vanities or doing what’s expected of us in this often cruel, emotionless, and ultra-realistic society. We die on the inside if forced to insert ourselves in the latter, but when it comes to the former we’re not exactly the bundles of (worldly) happiness that some other types can be. Take me for example, if someone came to me with a problem I’ll be likely to delve deeply into it for them and make shit 10x more depressing before giving them anything positive / reassuring. Some other types will go straight to showering you with their cheerfulness and optimism but not us. It’s in our nature to go deep into, and really try to decode what hurts us in this world and we do the same for the people we care about.

We are the diamond in the rough, the little light in the midst of a great darkness, but the vast majority of people around us are still more than happy to be dancing in the dark / getting themselves roughed up for all its joys, sorrows and insanity, figuratively speaking. It takes a special kind of heart and soul to look beyond it.

I think it takes a special kind of person who’s not only open-minded enough, but likely having a degree of world-weariness in him / herself that will put in the time and energy to look for someone like us. Contrary to what we may think of ourselves, we are actually VERY high maintenance / high investment due to the deeper level of exchange, connection, and understanding that we so deeply crave. Not many folks out there even have the capacity for that, or even if they have a little it’s likely they’ll get tired by us because this is our primary mode of living.

An INFP (again, may or may not be true for other NF types) in this utterly broken world ideally needs a balance of traits in a life partner that isn’t always easy to find. They’ve got to be someone who is sensitive and responds to many things / sees many things in a way that’s similar to yet complements that of the INFP, someone who understands and shares the INFP’s insightful and introspective nature and like I said, probably with a degree of world-weariness him / herself, but at the same time, is still able to handle making the sacrifices needed to attain some semblance of happiness in this world, ones that the INFP is hesitant / completely unable or unwilling to make. The INFP very much needs to feel reassured, but also protected from the wind and rain. I’m not saying we can’t handle any adversity but it’s really something that kills us from the inside over a period of time.

Speaking in purely practical / materialistic terms, it dawned on me today that although we’re about as far from being materialistic as one could possibly me (not to say we don’t enjoy some nice stuff every once in a while or don’t spend on say a hobby or something like that, I personally prefer experiences over things, cliche yes I know), the crushing realization of what it takes to survive in this unbalanced and heartless world means that in practice, for the partner of the INFP, we can actually be, in a way, more financially “demanding” than we appear and that we would benefit greatly from a more established financial arrangement (in whatever way) where we can best use our good qualities while being protected from physical deprivation and other hard consequences. Again of course it’s not that we are materialistic ourselves, it’s just that we need more protection from the brutality of this world than many other types. Of course, in an ideal state of things, we’d be unstoppable (in a good way).

Our ability to adapt is less so than say, an ENTP, or maybe even ENFPs. While we all share Ne, our dominant function is Fi, and combined with that Fi-Si loop it can be hard for us to remain truly open-minded to new ways of engaging because it’s all filtered through our personal values which are then reinforced and put into a loop of determining what makes us happy and not, what we like and dislike for future reference when we look into the past (Si). It’s also very hard for us, being N types, to really “live in the moment” despite me always saying I should be doing more of that.

I feel we’re vastly unappreciated and will continue to be this way until there are sweeping, fundamental changes to how people think of life. Until then, we can only pick up one scrap at a time and do what we can to hopefully make the world a slightly better place. And if someone decides to take us along for the ride, and does so with understanding and appreciation, even admiration, that would be great.

I know I very much want to get married and start a family, and that I won’t be raising my kids to be the way I’d hate to be myself / force them to do what I’d hate to do myself.
 
And I also feel that just the fact how I can often put stuff into writing better than talking a lot of times already makes me feel a bit handicapped when engaging the wider world. What matters in this world is how you can get your point across in a manner that’s as understandable and time savvy as possible, people usually don’t want to hear or make time for anything more than that. Everything can be commodified, everything can be analyzed / stripped of its inherent value. I wouldn’t want to marry someone who agrees with and goes with this kind of flow.
 
And there are times where I ask myself, how the heck can people find any sort or semblance of genuine happiness in this mess? Is it really “happiness”, or just bursts of satisfaction with varying degrees of length and intensity? Is it even “contentment” or an attitude of resignation towards wishing / looking for something better and more genuine?

Of course there’s the old saying that one should focus on what they can change and not think too much about what they cannot, but then I feel that’s easy to do when you either don’t even feel any sense of loss over the bad things that you can’t control / make better, or even agree with and take part in the things that makes this world the way it is.
 
21 - 40 of 96 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top