Personality Cafe banner

1 - 20 of 286 Posts

·
MOTM Nov 2010
Joined
·
10,402 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
In reviewing my dating history, I've found I've fallen in love with both sensors and intuitives, thinkers and feelers. There was only one thing that was common in all of them: my mission to understand each one of them. It's very important for me to understand how to communicate with my mate. I don't want to change anyone and I don't want someone to change me. I'd rather we accept each other as is and continue to grow in the relationship and independently.

My last boyfriend was an ESFJ. He was the only one whose MBTI type I knew before we started dating. I told him about our differences in cognitive functions but he was determined to date me because he knew we had things in common. But for the first time I had an added skepticism due to MBTI.

On the forum, I often share openly about my relationship with my INTJ ex. I usually say it was the most compatible relationship that I've ever had. And this still holds true. But we did not meet and become attracted to each other because of MBTI. We met on [Get Your Perfect Match.com]. There is a certain filtering process that happens before a person contacts me there. That's why I liked it. So before the INTJ and I even met, we already knew what each other sorta looked like and we had each other's basic qualifiers out of the way.

For instance, before we met I already knew our common commitment to fitness and health, we knew our common stance on religion, I knew we both weren't smokers, our education level was the same, even our financial bracket was the same. We knew we shared favorite authors, favorite night spots, how often we each enjoyed an alcoholic beverage and favorite hobbies. And it was very much "out there" on our profiles that we had the same political and also had a liberal mindset. We both knew we were looking for a long term commitment. All this was known before he approached me and before we had our first date. Those were our basic qualifiers. What a great set up, right? The chances for romance are pretty high. I knew nothing about MBTI and it wouldn't have made a difference to me if I did. All those "basic qualifications" would have been much more important.

This filtering process on the net is important to me. I don't like being approached in public by strangers. I feel like they don't know me and I'm just some piece of meet they are sexually attracted to. Obviously that can happen on the internet as well and people can lie, but there is a way to filter and make it a bit tougher for that kind of thing to happen.

I've also had other dates where we had these "basic qualifiers" in tastes and values. But there was no attraction on my end. I still don't think that is due to MBTI. I think a lot of it has to do with physical attraction. Sure, someone is a brain, has my hobbies, has published many journals in my field, runs ultra marathons, but I feel like I'm hanging out with my sister when I'm with them. It's not going to happen for me.

And I wouldn't bother dating someone if they didn't have the above basic qualifications, even if they were considered the most compatible type "in theory". It would be a waste of my time. It also would be a waste of my time if I bothered to find them gorgeous, yet they were completely culturally different and I had no respect for what they did in life and they had little respect for what I do. "Let's just have sex" wouldn't do it for me.

I think both my INTJ and I were very careful people who didn't waste time on dating people we knew weren't for us from the get go. We had a similar background we could talk about these things. He told me much later about MBTI and him being an INTJ. We tested me too. We found out I was an ENFP. But he couldn't believe it. He guessed ENTP. We didn't use MBTI in the relationship. We both used other psychologists who had published books on relationships.

Our relationship did hit a crossroad and I decided to end things. But I won't say that INTJs are bad. I don't know all INTJs. And my partner was NOT just an INTJ. But even so, we had our problems. I found him incredibly selfish at times. I really believed that if I was ever on my death bed, he would actually make me get up to go and get my own glass of water. Does that mean I lack understanding? Does that mean I think all INTJs are bad? Hell no. But the reasons I think my INTJ and I got along were not due to MBTI at all. It was because we had shared values and many other things in common. Also, I work my ass off in relationships trying to understand where my mate is coming from. It's not easy for me to throw in the towel.

And at what point do we say "okay he's different because of functions, but it's still not for me"?

I came to this forum to understand "what happened" in all my relationships based on MBTI. But still to this day, I'm attracted to whom I am attracted to. It has nothing to do with MBTI. But MBTI is a very useful tool in understanding someone you are already with. It's useful in my private teaching. It's also a shorthand way to describe someone to someone else who knows MBTI.

But when you're in a relationship, doesn't intimacy go deeper than just cognitive functions?

I've always said finding a date is easy but compatibility is harder to find. Look at all these divorced rock stars and models if you don't believe me. They are all sick of each other.

When seeking a potential mate, I am not going to add tension to a relationship by only looking at "compatible MBTI type" yet having different values, hobbies, work ethic, finances, educational background, etc. And I'm not going to avoid sexual attraction just because MBTI theorists say "we get along". There's already too many sexless relationships. I mean really, I "get along" with my girlfriends too. But a romantic partner does need to have something a little different to keep me committed. And I don't think any guy would appreciate it if I thought of him as one of my "girlfriends".

I have to be careful. I can see other people's views sometimes too easily. Especially if I love them. I know I can "get along" with just about anyone. But I'm looking for an equal partnership. Not someone whose cognitive functions I deem as compatible with mine. People are people. They are not functions. I've never been attracted to a function alone. It's attached to someone. Someone beautiful, hopefully. And getting to know a person beyond their functions is just a beginning in compatibility and attraction. There are so many other factors involved.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,429 Posts
I regard type extremely important in mate-selection. What you say is true, that it is the PEOPLE that are important, rather than their cognitive makeup. But I do not grow attached to anyone without a specific and static mindset that goes along the lines of extraverted, intuitive, feeling, and perceiving. I've simply found no other type attractive. Only ENFPs really want to know what I have to say, it seems most other people simply want my attention.

There is a distinct compatability within type dynamics, and since I'm an INTJ I will not settle for anything less than the best. However, simply BEING an ENFP does not cut it. Obviously they must be a female. Secondly there are many other characteristics within that person that must compensate what might be a dull personality.

I personally enjoy the company of people who are the most different than others. The stranger the person, the more interesting they usually are. Now what type actually STRIVES to be unique, above any other? ENFPs are extremely diverse, even within their own groups, and many times ENJOY being the odd ball of a group. Intentionally standing out from the croud is enormously attractive, it is something that I would never go out of my way for, and that no other type cares about as much as an ENFP. which = instant respect from me

No doubt, any type can successfully mate with anything other type, but my criteria are relentless.

Edit: which is probably why I have never had a girlfriend. XD
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,417 Posts
To be honest I don't even think about typology outside this forum that much, I feel thinking about people in terms of functions and letters that much is slightly delusional and unhealthy, considering it's only a theory. It's especially unhealthy to deem every human trait with a function - the theory is not supposed to be used this way.

I'm interested in understanding the person alright, but using such a theory can lead to misconceptions instead of understanding. My last girlfriend was an ESTP, according to this theory my Jung type is INFJ (though my MBTI, if it matters at all; is INTJ), we're opposites but I haven't been that close to someone in a long, long while. There's only been about six other people I can say I've opened up to and trusted as much as I opened up to and trusted her. We had a lot of interests in common and she even tried to take interests in what I was interested in and we were quite compatible. After all, personality does not determine chemistry.

I only use Jung to make people think I understand them (by naming function traits I've seen them use), so they think I can relate to them (due to the forer effect or maybe the theory is that applicable) and then they're mine and I can do whatever I want with them. It always works. I won't do anything bad but from my experience that's the use typology can bring to the table when it comes to dating. Basically, you can convince someone you understand them by recognizing what function they use and telling them "I know, you love to live in the moment and you're very realistic [Se], I like that about you", you barely know them and you can tell them that? They'll be impressed that you've taken such an interest and feel special.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,794 Posts
I agree with you pink, I think the person is more important than their type. I might meet someone who is of a type 'compatible' with my type but if they don't share the same interests with me, or have interests that I find intriguing, or have the same values, religious or political beliefs as me then it really doesn't matter what type they are.

I've been struggling with this typology stuff...On the one hand I like trying to work out other people's types so I can better understand them, but on the other hand I don't want knowing a person's type to cause me to make a judgement on them, that they behave a certain way because of their type and their functions. Or to decide straight away that I won't get on with a person because I supposedly 'clash' with their type. I also don't want knowing a person's type to make me doubt whether I can trust them or whether I'd be compatible with them.

So I really don't believe in 'writing-off' a person because of their type.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,505 Posts
I can tell what you mean. I like to see it as systems within systems. The MBTI captures the person in the loosest sense, the enneagram explains more into why a Type 9 ENFJ, for example, may seem more attractive to a type 5 INTP than a type 2 (for obvious reasons that I will not explain). I understand thinking like this just over complicates everything, but it always gives me a sense of what kind of person they are.

I'm not going to lie, I have several sensor friends, but to go by calling them a sensor is asinine. An ESTJ, for example, as a friend with an INFJ is considered a duality relationship: "Dual will naturally protect your weak points and appreciate the strong ones without asking for anything in return. Interaction with your Dual allows you to be yourself without the need to adjust to your partner like in other relations. " (Relations of Duality between psychological ("personality") types). If you didn't read into socionics relations, you would probably dismiss the sensor, or intuit (if your naturally a sensor) immediately. I guess it pays to really read into the system, but not to put too much importance on it. There is always going to be an exception, and if you think it can be explained you are probably right. But who likes to unravel the mysticism of a relationship?

Nice post.
 

·
MOTM Nov 2010
Joined
·
10,402 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
If you didn't read into socionics relations, you would probably dismiss the sensor, or intuit (if your naturally a sensor) immediately.
I didn't read into socionics relations and I didn't dismiss the sensor. In fact, I had a 2 year relationship with an ISTP.

It certainly wasn't the most compatible relationship I ever had. We did break up. And I know why it didn't work too. My personal preferences and threshold will override anything socionics or any other theory dictates. And probably if I had read socionics, I would have turned off more of my common sense and instincts about a person and would have stayed too long in something that wasn't good for either of us.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,505 Posts
I didn't read into socionics relations and I didn't dismiss the sensor. In fact, I had a 2 year relationship with an ISTP.

It certainly wasn't the most compatible relationship I ever had. We did break up. And I know why it didn't work too. My personal preferences and threshold will override anything socionics or any other theory dictates. And probably if I had read socionics, I would have turned off more of my common sense and instincts about a person and would have stayed too long in something that wasn't good for either of us.
ENFP - ISTP is considered a duality relationship too (which means good business in the socionics book) but that alone doesn't mean too much. Sorry about the relationship breaking too, duality, just over identical relations, are meant to be the bomb digity.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,597 Posts
This filtering process on the net is important to me. I don't like being approached in public by strangers. I feel like they don't know me and I'm just some piece of meet they are sexually attracted to. Obviously that can happen on the internet as well and people can lie, but there is a way to filter and make it a bit tougher for that kind of thing to happen.
I wouldn't say that has to be true. I do prefer online dating sites, too, but I think approaching a stranger is okay if they are radiating some message...i.e. a shirt or other article of clothing displaying something of meaning, like a Fight Club reference or a zeitgeist advertisement or a Tool (band) logo. That happens so rarely, though...

And I feel the need to comment on the N/S comment a few posts back. That's seriously a bunch of bullshit. If you meet a sensor with any self awareness at all they can keep right up with any intuitor. Personally, all my closest friends are iNtuitors these days...and yes it is abstract conversation, and no, we are not friends by accident.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,117 Posts
I can't see myself being with a woman long-term if she isn't IXTX. Shot term would be a different matter and any type would do as it would be based on occational sex & company but it would be just that - short term.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,597 Posts
I can't see myself being with a woman long-term if she isn't IXTX. Shot term would be a different matter and any type would do as it would be based on occational sex & company but it would be just that - short term.
I used to think that...until I met feelers who can use logic. They're pretty fucking awesome.

That's when I really thought about what I want in a partner. I realized what I want is someone who is truly aware what they are and how the world around them really works. I also realized there's nothing a T can do that an F can't.
 

·
MOTM Nov 2010
Joined
·
10,402 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
I used to think that...until I met feelers who can use logic. They're pretty fucking awesome.

That's when I really thought about what I want in a partner. I realized what I want is someone who is truly aware what they are and how the world around them really works. I also realized there's nothing a T can do that an F can't.
Lol. I think it would have been difficult for me to graduate from college or own a business if I didn't use logic.

Also, I think it would be near impossible to have a relationship with someone who has incredibly under developed empathy. Its part of healthy development as humans.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,128 Posts
I used to think that...until I met feelers who can use logic. They're pretty fucking awesome.
Oh yes we are, LOL!

But still, that particular set of matching traits does not depend on type.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,417 Posts
Well, you do have to remember, despite what's written in Myers Briggs descriptions, F doesn't mean emotional and irrational and vice versa for Ts. Fundamentally Fs focus on the purpose of things and Ts on the truth of things so I don't know what gives people this impression, Fi users can be very fluffy of course and Fe users at times I suppose but that's not what the functions are supposed to entail, I think we see this because those who have taken the test take an interest in this black and white "thinkers are "logical" and feelers are "irrational"" and they relate to it thus give people the impression that Fs are this way and Ts are that way. Usually, thanks to the sliding scales in the MBTI there are many who are in between but the general attitude towards them thanks to this sliding scale is that they're "xs" and undecided.

I'm more "logical" and rational than more than half of the people claiming to be thinkers seem to be, so much so that I don't know how they live their lives at all if they're anything like me always trying to talk sense into people, always staying calm and collected in rough situations, always being ridiculously honest, not doing something unless I have a perfectly good reason or justification (which all cause me serious problems in my life that I haven't seen anyone else go through). I've had so many people say "you can't be a feeler", they're obviously getting the wrong idea of what a feeler is. In fact, I did once too, I thought every time I was kind to someone or empathized with someone I was using Fi lol.

But yeah, you get my point (if you've made it this far), thinkers and feelers are both rational types and I think the result and behaviour people associate with the F function comes from extreme examples of people relating (and then getting interested because of how much they related which many people admit gets them interested in the first place) to the "feeler" questions on the MBTI or maybe I'm wrong but I've never seen these extreme examples IRL.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,597 Posts
Lol. I think it would have been difficult for me to graduate from college or own a business if I didn't use logic.

Also, I think it would be near impossible to have a relationship with someone who has incredibly under developed empathy. Its part of healthy development as humans.
haha. That's probably why there's so many single T's on here. I know for a while over on the ISTP board, it seemed like there was an unofficial competition for who could be the coldest jerk. It may not be what F and T are supposed to represent, but that's what it has developed into here. I rarely post on the ISTP section anymore because I'm so out of place...god forbid I have any kind of emotion and embrace it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
I might use type as one indicator, but it wouldn't be my final judgment on someone. Other compatibility, like how you both want to spend your time, and what your values are, strike me as much more important. Of course it does drive me crazy when I can't pin someone down to a type, and they refuse to take the test or grant it any validity whatsoever. I think it would be amusing to date someone of "my own type" or hell, someone anything like me, as I only date polar opposites. And that has turned out sooo well ;)
 

·
MOTM Nov 2010
Joined
·
10,402 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
haha. That's probably why there's so many single T's on here. I know for a while over on the ISTP board, it seemed like there was an unofficial competition for who could be the coldest jerk. It may not be what F and T are supposed to represent, but that's what it has developed into here. I rarely post on the ISTP section anymore because I'm so out of place...god forbid I have any kind of emotion and embrace it.
Yes Lucky, I've seen you and you've always been incredibly supportive of different types.

In regards to feelings, I will never apologize for being in touch with my feelings. I won't apologize for the fact that I paid my therapist a butt load of money to make me more consciously aware of my emotions. I'm not going to apologize for wanting to be a healthy individual who gets along well with others.

I think people often forget that anger and hurt are also emotions. Sadness is an emotion too. Crying is not an emotion, it is a behavior. Yelling and screaming is not an emotion, it is a behavior. Envy and jealousy (insecurity,fear, anxiety) are emotions and not behaviors. This is so important to understand. A person may have any of these emotions and not react based on their emotions. For instance, an envious person can discover their envy and stop themselves before having a reaction. They can stop themselves before they bully or sabotage someone else.

I think anyone who is more consciously aware of their inner states of emotions will less likely be a slave to any negative behaviors or knee jerk reactions. Fear, joy, sadness, and anger are probably at the root of a lot of people's emotions. But I think the sometimes knee jerk behavior of crying for some people is probably the least likely to hurt someone else. But once again, that also takes being in touch with one's hurt or sadness, a primary emotion.

If someone were to tell me that they have never felt hurt, anger, or sadness, it would tip me off that there is a seriously problem there. Something that needs to be taken care of in therapy. If someone were to tell me that they never felt happiness or joy, I would wonder if they were depressed.

In a relationship if someone were to tell me, "Sorry, I just got scared of losing you" I would think there is a person who is not just "in touch" with their emotions, but is honest about them.
 
1 - 20 of 286 Posts
Top