Personality Cafe banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 128 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,174 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Here is my theory there with respect to type I think there are generally certain traits that appear more masculine or feminine.


So let's have at it shall we?

Masculine:
E
S
T
J

Feminine:
I
N
F
P

based on this gross and admittedly shitty oversimplification (I'll redo the same thing using functions late but we start here for brevity) we can build a table from least masculine to most masculine.

4 Letters are femine:
INFP

4 Letters are masculine:
ESTJ

3 Letters are feminine:
ENFP
ISFP
INTP
INFJ

3 Letters are masculine:
ISTJ
ESTP
ESFJ
ENTJ

Blah.. as you can see this quickly falls apart so how about we use our knowledge of functions.
aha!

So lets pick the most masculine and most feminine and compare.

ESTJ -> Te Si Ne Fi
INFP -> Fi Ne Si Te

Notice anything?

Let's take it futher, lets add other masculine and femine types. The next most masculine in my eyes is the ENTJ let's compare to the ESTJ
ENTJ -> Te Ni Se Fi
ESTJ -> Te Si Ne Fi

Notice anything? The most masculine starts with Te.
So how to pick the next most masculine set?
No idea.

I think I'm tripping over function interrelation here!

Add your opinions!

*stupid opinions will be ignored.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Staryu and Zinette

·
Registered
Joined
·
722 Posts
I don't know if I 100 percent understand you. Perhaps I do though so let me give it a try:

I see ESTP's as having fairly masculine traits. So what if dominant Se is next in line. I would think that it would be responsible for impulsiveness and risk taking which is usually not associated with femininity.

ESTP > Se Ti Fe Ni

**ESFP > Se Fi Te Ni [This kind of starts to fall out of line though with the lettering. Although I suppose that that really wouldn't matter too much. Perhaps in order to figure out Feminine and Masculine traits in types it might be best to break it down moreso by function + their position as opposed to lettering? I dunno]

I've never encountered an ESFP before so I don't know how they'd behave. I could imagine them being somewhat masculine

Function wise they might always be trying to get the strongest reaction from the things that they sense in their environment, They would focus mostly on their own values, They care about efficiency but might struggle with it a bit due to Fi getting in the way and i'm not too sure about how Ni might act in the 4th position but I know that Se would get in the way.

What do you thiink?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,174 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
I don't know if I 100 percent understand you. Perhaps I do though so let me give it a try:

I see ESTP's as having fairly masculine traits. So what if dominant Se is next in line. I would think that it would be responsible for impulsiveness and risk taking which is usually not associated with femininity.

ESTP > Se Ti Fe Ni

**ESFP > Se Fi Te Ni [This kind of starts to fall out of line though with the lettering. Although I suppose that that really wouldn't matter too much. Perhaps in order to figure out Feminine and Masculine traits in types it might be best to break it down moreso by function + their position as opposed to lettering? I dunno]

I've never encountered an ESFP before so I don't know how they'd behave. I could imagine them being somewhat masculine

Function wise they might always be trying to get the strongest reaction from the things that they sense in their environment, They would focus mostly on their own values, They care about efficiency but might struggle with it a bit due to Fi getting in the way and i'm not too sure about how Ni might act in the 4th position but I know that Se would get in the way.

What do you thiink?

ESFP's are your stereotypical slut, they are very feminine and are practically the definition of "ditzy"

Se means they have a good grouding in the environment and filtered through how they feel about it.
ESFP's are upbeat positive and always looking for a party.
The thing you have to look for is where Fi and Fe are in the function order.
Those determine whether someone values how other people feel or how they feel.
So Fi and Ti will often express itself as a sort of selfishness and me first attitude.
The selfishness of both the esfp and estp are pretty remarkable though not immediately apparent.


The function orders are related in some mathematically definable way that I have yet to grasp.
But I have this hunch that the further down Fx is in relation to Te has something to do with.
Both types lack intuition hence they have to "live in the moment"
if you want to find ESXP's you can find them wherever theres a party. Usually gaining alot of attention and not entirely sure how they will get home.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,694 Posts
I disagree, with which is masculin and which is feminine.

But I disagree with something of more importance, society tells both genders how they should be. Women are told to be "loving" and "nurturing" which then in turn makes them develop their type. It's not the other way around.

Being a female ENTJ is hard, I have been told so many times it's not right to be the way I am. But I ignore that, I am who I am because I chose not to listen to lies. You should do some reading on sociological theories of gender roles before you continue your theory so it won't be so biased.

Here are some:
sociological theories of gender roles
Introduction to Sociology/Gender - Wikibooks, collection of open-content textbooks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
722 Posts
ESFP's are your stereotypical slut, they are very feminine and are practically the definition of "ditzy"

Se means they have a good grouding in the environment and filtered through how they feel about it.
ESFP's are upbeat positive and always looking for a party.
The thing you have to look for is where Fi and Fe are in the function order.
Those determine whether someone values how other people feel or how they feel.
So Fi and Ti will often express itself as a sort of selfishness and me first attitude.
The selfishness of both the esfp and estp are pretty remarkable though not immediately apparent.


The function orders are related in some mathematically definable way that I have yet to grasp.
But I have this hunch that the further down Fx is in relation to Te has something to do with.
Both types lack intuition hence they have to "live in the moment"
if you want to find ESXP's you can find them wherever theres a party. Usually gaining alot of attention and not entirely sure how they will get home.
Going off topic for a quick moment: I always wondered about Fi and selfishness. I dunno that one with Fi would necessarily HAVE to be selfish especially if they had a balance between how much they relied on their Fi and whatever was the opposite but I have noticed that. My ENFP and INFP friends usually have their ME moments at times which lead me to wonder if that fit in with selfishness or not.

Back on topic though ENTJwillruletheworld made a good point and before I read what she said I was wondering how would a ESFP act if they were male?

Just out of curiousity what made you single out Te and where Fx was in relation to determine which functions might appear more masculine or Feminine?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
722 Posts
I disagree, with which is masculin and which is feminine.

But I disagree with something of more importance, society tells both genders how they should be. Women are told to be "loving" and "nurturing" which then in turn makes them develop their type. It's not the other way around.

Being a female ENTJ is hard, I have been told so many times it's not right to be the way I am. But I ignore that, I am who I am because I chose not to listen to lies. You should do some reading on sociological theories of gender roles before you continue your theory so it won't be so biased.

Here are some:
sociological theories of gender roles
Introduction to Sociology/Gender - Wikibooks, collection of open-content textbooks
You bring up a good point and that page is just the type of thing I was actually looking for. I wanted something that spelled out what is masculine vs what is feminine so I didn't have to do all of the guesswork. Hmm my brain is spinning so I can't really say much more beyond this point on the issue other than thanx.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,694 Posts
You bring up a good point and that page is just the type of thing I was actually looking for. I wanted something that spelled out what is masculine vs what is feminine so I didn't have to do all of the guesswork. Hmm my brain is spinning so I can't really say much more beyond this point on the issue other than thanx.
Sure, I personally think that it's just bull to assume that people are genetically a certain way as far as gender roles go! People are taught these things. DNA has no play in it!
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,174 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Going off topic for a quick moment: I always wondered about Fi and selfishness. I dunno that one with Fi would necessarily HAVE to be selfish especially if they had a balance between how much they relied on their Fi and whatever was the opposite but I have noticed that.
It's still getting parsed out in my head.
Fi and Ti are related to internal values what do I think and what about MY feelings.
Having them high in the function order would produce what very much appears to be a selfish person.

My ENFP and INFP friends usually have their ME moments at times which lead me to wonder if that fit in with selfishness or not.
Dependant of their value system as determined by their leading or second function.

Back on topic though ENTJwillruletheworld made a good point and before I read what she said I was wondering how would a ESFP act if they were male?
Like an ESTP, their more feminine side will be somewhat suppressed due to their need to fit in as defined by their type.

Most types will look like other types except for the more dominant Types.
Alpha Male Te as their first function.
Aplha Female Fe as their first function.

Just out of curiousity what made you single out Te and where Fx was in relation to determine which functions might appear more masculine or Feminine?
think of what society defines as male throughout history.

1. Dominant. -> Xe as the first function, Xi as the second function.
2. Outgoing. -> Xe as the first function.
3. Decisive. -> Rational as the dominant function -> Tx or Fx
4. Unemotional -> Fx lower in the function order.

Combining 1 and 2 you get
Te as the first function and Ni or Si as the second, of course if you follow the rules a rational function will always follow an irrational function and vice versa. Also the second function will always be introverted if the first is extroverted.

So Te will always be alpha male.
I'm not willing to do the legwork now, but I'm guessing Fe will be alpha female.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
722 Posts
I disagree, with which is masculin and which is feminine.

But I disagree with something of more importance, society tells both genders how they should be. Women are told to be "loving" and "nurturing" which then in turn makes them develop their type. It's not the other way around.

Being a female ENTJ is hard, I have been told so many times it's not right to be the way I am. But I ignore that, I am who I am because I chose not to listen to lies. You should do some reading on sociological theories of gender roles before you continue your theory so it won't be so biased.

Here are some:
sociological theories of gender roles
Introduction to Sociology/Gender - Wikibooks, collection of open-content textbooks
I haven't read yet but I was just thinking....

In the past gender roles were created basically because of environment which would cause one to stifle whatever parts of their personality type didn't fit it. Men had to be providers and women were the caretakers. BUT NOW with the changes in our environment we now don't have to fit into those roles anymore. So the idea of gender roles are basically just remnants of the past that we feel we still must adhere to in some way. So while it still would play a role in us developing our type...taking into account our freedoms now...there would still be types that appeared to be more masculine than feminine...Right?

Seems like Gender Roles would just be an environmental factor which would influence development (and perhaps would even attribute to why personality disorders might develop). But types that were fully developed might still display "masculine" and "feminine" traits.

What do you think?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,174 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
I disagree with this and absolutes in general. I know several men that use the Te function and are not alpha at all.
People don't use their Te function any more than they use their skin color.
Yes absolutes are uncomfortable.
That said what type is this person.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MilkyWay132

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,174 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
I haven't read yet but I was just thinking....

In the past gender roles were created basically because of environment which would cause one to stifle whatever parts of their personality type didn't fit it. Men had to be providers and women were the caretakers. BUT NOW with the changes in our environment we now don't have to fit into those roles anymore. So the idea of gender roles are basically just remnants of the past that we feel we still must adhere to in some way. So while it still would play a role in us developing our type...taking into account our freedoms now...there would still be types that appeared to be more masculine than feminine...Right?

Seems like Gender Roles would just be an environmental factor which would influence development (and perhaps would even attribute to why personality disorders might develop). But types that were fully developed might still display "masculine" and "feminine" traits.

What do you think?
Gender roles were not created.
They evolved, and we have not evolved past them. nor will we likely ever.
To think you have is a tragic delusion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
722 Posts
Gender roles were not created.
They evolved, and we have not evolved past them. nor will we likely ever.
To think you have is a tragic delusion.
I never said that evolution didn't play a role. I didn't mean created in the actual sense of the word. I'm busy thinking and writing as I think so don't read into it so much. I probably should've used formed as opposed to created but whatever.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
I think the only trait that has a strong correlation with perceived masculinity/femininity is T/F. An ESTP female would almost certainly seem more masculine than an ESFJ female, but they both have only one letter different from the personality type which you think seems most masculine. The same could be said for ISTJ and ENTJ females.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,174 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
I think the only trait that has a strong correlation with perceived masculinity/femininity is T/F. An ESTP female would almost certainly seem more masculine than an ESFJ female, yet they both have only one letter different from the personality type which you think seems most masculine. The same could be said for ISTJ and ENTJ females.
Thats because the four letter abbreviation is utterly useless for any in depth examination.
Check intp forum, I guarantee you'll find several threads about gender confusion.
now check the Isfp forum and I bet you find even more :)
I bet you won't find any threads of that sort on the ESTJ or ENTJ forums.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,174 Posts
Discussion Starter #16

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,694 Posts
I haven't read yet but I was just thinking....

In the past gender roles were created basically because of environment which would cause one to stifle whatever parts of their personality type didn't fit it. Men had to be providers and women were the caretakers. BUT NOW with the changes in our environment we now don't have to fit into those roles anymore. So the idea of gender roles are basically just remnants of the past that we feel we still must adhere to in some way. So while it still would play a role in us developing our type...taking into account our freedoms now...there would still be types that appeared to be more masculine than feminine...Right?

Seems like Gender Roles would just be an environmental factor which would influence development (and perhaps would even attribute to why personality disorders might develop). But types that were fully developed might still display "masculine" and "feminine" traits.

What do you think?
Well, even though times are changing and women have more freedoms society still seems to look down on women who are more dominant or sexually free. You know the whole "it's okay for a man to score and brag about it but not okay for a women to do so" idea, which is bull I might add. Especially if they are Christians, like I am. Even my Christian girl friends will tell me that I have to change. So a lot of it is with in religion. And how God wants women to be, or how men twist the bible to get what they want. Though I do think that this will change more giving time. Also, people tend to emulate in some way the personalities that their parents had. So that has a little to do with the personality development Dom v Sub thing. A great book to read if you care is Ten lies the Church tell women.

So to answer your question YES. Women should be more free. For the most part they are a lot more free and dom then they were in the 50s, so there is progress but society still encourages men to be dom and women to be sub. And other external factors mainly religion cage women. It's going to take more time for things to catch up. And to be honest what man doesn't want to be in control and sexually dominating to a woman? Which is wrong most women don't want to be controlled!!! So why would me support dom women especially Christian men. Oh hey one more thing you should look into if you care is the second shift, it's a sociological theory. All in all if you want more answers by a sociology book, even basic one should cover this a little.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,174 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
Religion has nothing to do with it.

People choose their religion and with it what they want to believe in it.

If you want a book to read the human zoo will explain it all.
Couple it with the manipulated man and you have a good explanation of the ramifications of the gender wars and the role our society have in shaping it.
You might also want to read the social contract for shits and giggles.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,694 Posts
Gender roles were not created.
They evolved, and we have not evolved past them. nor will we likely ever.
To think you have is a tragic delusion.
I disagree, I think we will be able to get past them at some point. Also, they were created and evolved . They both kinda mean the same thing. Gender rolls were created to solve sociological problems. And in part institutions were also created to enforce them.
 
1 - 20 of 128 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top