My project

[UDP]

Originally I decided to post it in this section of the forum because it was out of the way, and yet not messing up any other part of the forum. Then I realized it correlates very well with the "Journey" thread. And finally, I realized that it seems stereotypically alpha anyways.....

Without further ado,

I am going to break from classical socionics for a bit. I will continue posting in this forum of course, because socionics will still be very relevant to me. I will use this thread to discuss certain breaks I am making, from the standpoint that I am an LII. I am not sure just what to make of what I am doing, but I know I must go forward to find out the truth. I may just realize that nothing really has changed, I may not. But it is time to press forward. So basically, everything from here on out (in this thread at least) will be diverting from the restraints of classic socionics somewhat. Again - classic socionics is great, but this is one lead I am going to follow regardless of what other people have written.


PS: In one sense, I believe what I am doing makes me more LII than ever before -- it is, without a doubt, a mental/understanding type of fascination and draw. But it incorporates much, much more than just "the mind".

[UDP]

The current topic I am going to bring up is sexual type: aggressor, caregiver, infantile, victim.


I am in no way an infantile type. Not at all. I used to be, I am sure of that. But I cannot tolerate it. Consider how, in INTJ profiles, they describe how if an INTJ sees something working right, or someone who is doing something properly -- it makes them want to take charge, or take over, etc. They are compelled to set things straight. (edited in: and if you see me as a victim type, you are completely incorrect)


Well, in that way, such is how I feel about relationships. Everyone I see is dealing with them in their own way... which is fine. But for myself, in no way can I take a subordinate role in my relationship. I feel at this moment as though I am somewhere between an aggressor and a caregiver, honestly. And since I am rational, that makes you assume ISTj or ISFj -- of course, ISTj being much more fitting, or so it would appear. (And yet, ((at this moment)), I feel more drawn to Fi types))). So nothing is exactly fitting the classic socionics Ti structure (as I see it).


So my first topic is going to be understanding the aggressor/victim sort of relationship. Previously I was against he idea that I am an aggressor, because maintaining the relationship in such a way - ordering someone around and such, or being overly dominant, was a turn off - it seemed like a hassle, it seemed like the victim would have to be quite immature to so willingly subordinate themselves like that. NOW, however, I almost welcome it. I see very little in the way of competence in regard to letting other people be in control of my relationship to them. Especially something personal, something close.

So I wonder if an aggressor type role for myself would be more advantageous - and more pleasing - to whoever I am with. I mean, it seems unlikely that an ESFj would enjoy tolerating my demanding-ness (or would they) -- it seems like I would be better suited for an ENFj almost. And yet, my attraction to INFj types - who seem easily submissive to letting you control things - is also present. So, the dispute about vs is a major one.



That is all I will formally address right now: I have kept it in regard to relationship/erotic roles.

• Summary:
• Questionable - erotic attitudes
  [list:75acf73e3d]
• Personal role: Somewhere between aggressor and caregiver?
• What would the best fit role for my partner be?

[*]Questionable - Fi vs Fe[/list:u:75acf73e3d]

[UDP]

Aside:

Common social roles

1. The lone repository of truth -- the last stalwart in a crazy world of illogic and delusion.
2. The self-sacrificing workaholic who works so hard not to earn money (usually underpaid anyway), but because he (or she) doesn't feel he deserves to slow down and give anything less than 100%.
3. Mr. or Ms. Literal, who says exactly what (s)he means, and trusts that you will too.

Ah, they have got me pegged.
Although it is not because I do not feel like "I should slow down", but rather, 100% is the only way to really do something.


The odd thing is, in no way do I feel like I am not really an INTj. I just have ... other preferences in how I interact with people. Even going through wiki socion, reading the LII profile (above), it still hits home a great deal. I am just not sure who my best relational partner would be --- who would benefit most from me, and who I would benefit most from having (in terms of relationship roles and activities). I know she would be an F type, and a rational as well.

But I am not sure if I would be comfortable taking an Infantile role, in the general sense.

[mikemex]

What would you think about a person who tries to sell you a book which is supposed to give you ideas that are worth millions for 20 bucks?

Socionics is such a book. It is so good that it's being used by artificial intelligence researchers all over the world because its unmatched accuracy at describing the underlying thinking process of the human mind. The discover of information elements rendered neural networks obsolete. Model A is an architecture by its own.

The first socionical processors are shipping from Taiwan as we're speaking...

[Blaze]

What would you think about a person who tries to sell you a book which is supposed to give you ideas that are worth millions for 20 bucks?

Socionics is such a book. It is so good that it's being used by artificial intelligence researchers all over the world because its unmatched accuracy at describing the underlying thinking process of the human mind. The discover of information elements rendered neural networks obsolete. Model A is an architecture by its own.

The first socionical processors are shipping from Taiwan as we're speaking...

really? or are you just messin around? lol

[Gilly]

FWIW, I don't really relate to any of the erotic attitudes either.

Looking at these...

GULENKO'S EROTIC ATTITUDES

Careful
- ESTj
- ISTp
- ESFj
- ISFp

Aggressor
- ESTp
- ISTj
- ESFp
- ISFj

Victim
- ENTj
- INTp
- ENFj
- INFp

Infantile
- ENTp
- INTj
- ENFp
- INFj


Careful
- See other people in a caring but maybe arrogant way as if
they are somekind of "parent figure" and everyone else
needs their attention and help
- Interact as if they they are in control but not in aggressive way. This
type always acts in a caring way and expect the partner to accept
this care without rebellion
- Has an openly "patronizing" subtype and a subtype that applies
"care" indirectly
- Hates signs of aggression in themself
- Has "I know what is best for you" attitude

Aggressor
- Sometimes is openly arrogant and aggressive and expects complete
mental submittal from others
- Sometimes has a very victim like look and uses indirect means to
control the partner. In the "heart" is as aggressive and control
oriented as the openly aggressive version. Can turn openly
aggressive if the "victim" refuses to submit to indirect
control.
- Hates signs of weakness in themself
- Has "I am in control" attitude

Victim
- Can project either a submissive or arrogant view of themselves
- The openly submissive version never questions the partners
control but expects the partner to "show the way" in all aspects
of the relationship or interaction
- The arrogant version looks aggressive and always challenges people
but the true meaning of this behaviour is to find an aggressor who
is stronger than the victim themself. This type can never be "tamed"
but the partner has to "apply force" at all times to keep the
arrogant victim under control
- Hates signs of weakness in others
- Has "I want you to control me (if you can)" attitude

Infantile
- Can be openly childlike/dreamer/detached or more formal looking with an "inner child"
- Has lots of needs and can be selfish (like a child) and expects
the partner to totally adapt to this behaviour
- Can be openly needy for loving and care
- On the other hand can be openly rebellious against care and
need a lot of "right kind of" attention
- Doesn't want the partner to directly control but instead set loose
"boundaries" and safe guards within which it is safe to play and have fun
- Hates signs of aggression or indifferency in others
- Has "I want you to be my friend and guardian angel" attitude

...I would probably say Victim more than anything, but overall I'd say a little of each.

[Blaze]

somebody wrote pretty good descriptions of the erotic attitudes and wikisocion. the one that fit the best for me is aggressor.

[UDP]

Mikemex - Socionics is great - there is real truth and real practicality in it. If I was not satisfied with it I would leave and discontinue using it.

[hr:fea447d54f]

Anyways,

I believe, for the sake of it, I am a "Mental Aggressor", so to say --- because I will dominate the thought arena of any relationship I am in, and always have. Someone's refusal to accept that in an intimate arena would be unsatisfactory.

Furthermore, once I am past the initial hesitation stage of developing a relationship, I am extremely dominant. Somewhat of an iron fist with velvet glove sort of thing, but given the current state of most everyone, they seem incompetent of really managing things properly.

[hr:fea447d54f]

Looking at what Gilly posted......

Careful
- See other people in a caring but maybe arrogant way as if
they are somekind of "parent figure" and everyone else
needs their attention and help
- Interact as if they they are in control but not in aggressive way. This
type always acts in a caring way and expect the partner to accept
this care without rebellion
- Has an openly "patronizing" subtype and a subtype that applies
"care" indirectly
- Hates signs of aggression in themself
- Has "I know what is best for you" attitude

People make me wonder if they sufficiently comprehend the best way to go about things, so yes, I do harbor a "I know what is best for you" attitude. Around people close to me, I believe I prefer an Si atmosphere, but I also have no reservations about using Se --- even more so, because they are closer to me, and it is even more important that they accept the truth about things even if it is discomforting.

Aggressor
- Sometimes is openly arrogant and aggressive and expects complete
mental submittal from others
- Sometimes has a very victim like look and uses indirect means to
control the partner. In the "heart" is as aggressive and control
oriented as the openly aggressive version. Can turn openly
aggressive if the "victim" refuses to submit to indirect
control.
- Hates signs of weakness in themself
- Has "I am in control" attitude

The "I am in control" attitude is something that I just noticed in myself, particularly because in the past I was unaware of taking that stance. It is something I am looking into.
Hates signs of weakness in themselves - absolutely I do (see signature). Furthermore, from an understanding standpoint, I do not really see a reason to not be able to overcome any weakness - anything I think is worthy enough I have confidence in my ability to do. As for being aggressive if "victim" refuses to submit - yes. There have been numerous occasions where I was compelled to completely take over the situation. Early on, I was held back by lack of knowledge, confidence in that knowledge, and ethical considerations, yet at present my understanding of them is adequate enough for me.

"Complete mental submittal" -- ironically, that sounds like what an intuitive type would want from its partner. This is another point of interest, as I understand Se types do want complete "mental submittal", but so do I.

Victim
- Can project either a submissive or arrogant view of themselves
- The openly submissive version never questions the partners
control but expects the partner to "show the way" in all aspects
of the relationship or interaction
- The arrogant version looks aggressive and always challenges people
but the true meaning of this behaviour is to find an aggressor who
is stronger than the victim themself. This type can never be "tamed"
but the partner has to "apply force" at all times to keep the
arrogant victim under control
- Hates signs of weakness in others
- Has "I want you to control me (if you can)" attitude

No.

Infantile
- Can be openly childlike/dreamer/detached or more formal looking with an "inner child"
- Has lots of needs and can be selfish (like a child) and expects
the partner to totally adapt to this behaviour
- Can be openly needy for loving and care
- On the other hand can be openly rebellious against care and
need a lot of "right kind of" attention
- Doesn't want the partner to directly control but instead set loose
"boundaries" and safe guards within which it is safe to play and have fun
- Hates signs of aggression or indifferency in others
- Has "I want you to be my friend and guardian angel" attitude

I can see myself as being, in infantile terms, extremely selfish, and extremely in need of " a lot of (the) 'right kind of' attention" from a caregiver. I am very curious as to if an ESE would really be able to provide me with what I am looking for.

[Exodus]

What would you think about a person who tries to sell you a book which is supposed to give you ideas that are worth millions for 20 bucks?

Socionics is such a book. It is so good that it's being used by artificial intelligence researchers all over the world because its unmatched accuracy at describing the underlying thinking process of the human mind. The discover of information elements rendered neural networks obsolete. Model A is an architecture by its own.

The first socionical processors are shipping from Taiwan as we're speaking...

really? or are you just messin around? lol

...what she said.

And I'm not sure what to make of this, UDP. It's quite an interesting development, to say the least. I hope you find what you're looking for.

[Jarno]

What would you think about a person who tries to sell you a book which is supposed to give you ideas that are worth millions for 20 bucks?

Socionics is such a book. It is so good that it's being used by artificial intelligence researchers all over the world because its unmatched accuracy at describing the underlying thinking process of the human mind. The discover of information elements rendered neural networks obsolete. Model A is an architecture by its own.

The first socionical processors are shipping from Taiwan as we're speaking...

I always thought (and still do) that those books just have the same title, but cover a totally different subject of science,
and have nothing to do with 'our' socionics.

Are you really really really sure you aren't mixing things?

artificial intelligence sounds like it has something to do with model A, but it is a conclusion to fast drawn.

http://www.amazon.com/Socionics-Scal.../dp/3540307079

[Gilly]

Hmmm...the WikiSocion Infantile is a lot better than this one, but I still relate to some elements of Victim and Aggressor.

[UDP]

[web:29808b3e92]http://the16types.info/forums/viewtopic.php?p=232587#232587[/web:29808b3e92]


I am not sure at the moment if it would be best to "conclude" this thread. My project may be applicable in terms of the "Beyond traditional LII" exploits I explore, but whether or not I should attempt to document them here is unclear.



PS: at any rate, the above thread, and this one here, have helped me to do some real introspection that perhaps was exactly what I needed at this time, because I was clearly able to state what my "mission" feels like it is - so now I have a much better idea of a mission statement to play out and live to, which is something I can be pleased with.

[Gilly]

Just a thought: could this mix-up with LSI be due, in part, to finally finding some motivation? It seems to me that your default state is not an active one (in the Se sense), which is, in part, the reason you've felt the need to "make a stand" and make some changes. You've got motivation and energy, and it's reflected in how other people perceive you, thus creating an image that isn't typically LII.

FWIW, I thought seriously about SLE for myself when I started making the same kinds of changes.

[Expat]

somebody wrote pretty good descriptions of the erotic attitudes and wikisocion. the one that fit the best for me is aggressor.

That "somebody" was yours truly.

Hmm, that is odd.

Hmmm...the WikiSocion Infantile is a lot better than this one, but I still relate to some elements of Victim and Aggressor.

But would you say that Infantile describes you generally?

Of course everyone should relate to elements of all four.

[Gilly]

Well, I don't really expect people to adapt to me. I'm actually really good at adapting to other people, as a matter of fact, so in terms of the role I play in a relationship, I'd be more Caregiver. And I hate it when someone tries to "take care" of me; the only person I let do that is my mother, and only because she loves doing it

As far as the actual sexuality goes, I'm not into Infantile/Caregiver. I don't mind "light caresses" and such, but I definitely prefer intensity; sex, or any sexual interaction, feels awkward for me if there isn't an element of force involved - a scratch, tight grasp, rough embrace; whatever it is, it's got to be there for a real sexual connection. Sex is synonymous with roughness. I even like a little violence once in a while If a woman tried to play Caregiver with me and "take over," I'd probably feel offended/insecure.

[Blaze]

somebody wrote pretty good descriptions of the erotic attitudes and wikisocion. the one that fit the best for me is aggressor.

That "somebody" was yours truly.

Hmm, that is odd.

the slam dunk was the aggressor to aggressor description, which described me and my ex exactly.

[Expat]

the slam dunk was the aggressor to aggressor description, which described me and my ex exactly.

But are you referring to your interactions when the relationship was already established, or how it actually got going in the beginning?

[Blaze]

the slam dunk was the aggressor to aggressor description, which described me and my ex exactly.

But are you referring to your interactions when the relationship was already established, or how it actually got going in the beginning?

does it make a difference? at the beginning it was not like that as much, but there was always an element of competition in the relationship.

[Gilly]

It does make a difference. People adapt to one another over time; if you're in a relationship with a person with whom you aren't compatible, you're going to have to change in order to maintain stability.

[Blaze]

It does make a difference. People adapt to one another over time; if you're in a relationship with a person with whom you aren't compatible, you're going to have to change in order to maintain stability.

i don't see how being competitive enhances stability at all.

[Gilly]

Because Aggressor - Aggressor is more healthy/natural than Infantile - Aggressor.

[Expat]

Well, first, I think that those Gulenko groups definitions should be separated from actual physical behavior -- perhaps they still play a role but there seems to be too much evidence against it.

Second, especially because of that, Rick suggested that we call it "romance styles" in the Wiki instead. So let us approach it another way and also think of it as how you instinctively go about trying to awaken a prospective partner's interest. I think that it is accurate to say that ENTps and ENFps tend to try to help the partner see the funny or bizarre side of things - try Weird Al Yankovic approaching a woman. Does that work?

[Blaze]

Because Aggressor - Aggressor is more healthy/natural than Infantile - Aggressor.

why not just move to victim rather than aggressor then?

[Expat]

Because Aggressor - Aggressor is more healthy/natural than Infantile - Aggressor.

why not just move to victim rather than aggressor then?

*shrug* I am wondering if any EP can become a Victim.

[Blaze]

Because Aggressor - Aggressor is more healthy/natural than Infantile - Aggressor.

why not just move to victim rather than aggressor then?

*shrug* I am wondering if any EP can become a Victim.

because......

[Expat]

because......

Because being a Victim is about expecting EP actions from others, not doing them yourself. I am just thinking out loud here, trying to make sense of this.

[Blaze]

because......

Because being a Victim is about expecting EP actions from others, not doing them yourself. I am just thinking out loud here, trying to make sense of this.

well you are saying then that one can only switch roles so far and maybe the switch from infantile to aggressor is more do-able than one from infantile to victim.

going from infantile to aggressor doesn't require a shift in basic temperament.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

I'm an Infatile, definitely. I just want somebody to protect and baby me. I don't know but like if somebody protects me I get really excited, I know some people might find that patronizing or insulting but I find it incredibly hot. Like I kinda feel like they're melting away all my self-doubts and insecurities like ice cream of course it has to be in a way that makes sense to me still, like I could probably still find some signs of protection patronizing.

I used to think I was a Victim but umm not anymore, I think I can get my caregiver to be as rough as I need them to be.

Your one and only top trainer,
Bullets

[UDP]

Right now, I feel like an ISTj who enjoys a certain amount of Si in my close relationships. I can provide it, or receive it, but ideological compatibility is most important.

Now, in regard to Squall....

Squall reminds me very much of myself. .... as I used to be when I was 17 years old. It seems hard for me to believe I was anything but an INTj for most of my life, until this last year. I have become even more Ti and IJ, but I believe I have been going further into Se than Ne, and although Ne is nice, a lot of the posts I see by ENTps - especially ******, and a lot of the things Ne LIIs say is somewhat repelling.

I find myself to be somewhat more gamma/delta atmosphere then alpha or beta. But there are exceptions.

LII - lives in his own idiosyncratic world. That could easily be me, seeing myself as someone who has morphed into an LSI, or even, enneagram 5- to -8 transition (which I relate to a whole lot).

LSI - picks the best institution and supports it. Seeing none worthy, I have spent time creating my own, and no I seek to live it out. ALSO, and very important, as sense of epic-ness and important, beta adventure perhaps, appeals to me.




A huge difference in my life between my earlier Squall days of "eh, leave me alone - lone wolf - very anti-social-ness" is seeing a direction, a purpose, and room for improvement. I am still cold and IJ, but I realize interacting with others is important for me. This is why I am going after a career in management or administration, and not an isolated science. I feel I have to interact with people, and I see a huge gap of decision making competence - which I want to fill.

[Sorc]

The way you talking/writing is very ordered and looks like Ti heavy..... also i like somehow it, so may be you supposed to be ISTj..... as i saw you in other threads... Also about sex roles : Finally all even, Victim is one who control Agressor by lighting his red light, provocating himself, and for return, kinds submissing himself, but really - in normal love its just roles as it said in socionics, sex is game, normally, in relationships all should be even, not same, but balanced .
(yes i hate all assymetrical relationships)
The rolle is only matter of approach, and if you go deeper into it there is very right reasons behind each role.

Also you can check your PoLR.... that might help also with finding you assymetrical cases.... like who appears to you to be Supervisor/Supervesee

[UDP]

So it looks like I am not really a part of alpha quadra after all.


Farewell.

[Gilly]

βitch.


Just playin with ya :wink: Hope your new Quadra suits you as well as this one has.

[Logos]

Strange how UDP was hailed as the perfect example of the INTj on this forum, and now he is convinced (by himself and others) that he is an ISTj. So it looks as if the INTjs are now in the market for a new forum poster child.

[Exodus]

Strange how UDP was hailed as the perfect example of the INTj on this forum, and now he is convinced (by himself and others) that he is an ISTj. So it looks as if the INTjs are now in the market for a new forum poster child.

ISTjs have had a bad rap on this forum, and this could be a way to change that. fwiw, I never thought that he was anything like a "perfect example" of an INTj.

Do you think that you could be ISTj?

[Logos]

Strange how UDP was hailed as the perfect example of the INTj on this forum, and now he is convinced (by himself and others) that he is an ISTj. So it looks as if the INTjs are now in the market for a new forum poster child.

ISTjs have had a bad rap on this forum, and this could be a way to change that. fwiw, I never thought that he was anything like a "perfect example" of an INTj.

Early on in my forum history here, Joy told me that I did match her image of an INTj. When I asked for an example of an archetypal INTj on this forum, her and others chimed in by saying UDP. So that is where the UDP as the INTj poster child comment came from.

Do you think that you could be ISTj?

Could be? There is always a maybe. Likely? No. I identify too much with Alpha quadra values, the Infantile, Static, Subjectivist dichotomies, intertype relationships and the INTj functions. The closest other type I have and would consider would be the ENTp, which would obviously be the ISTj's supervisor.

[UDP]

I was fairly convinced myself of being INTj as well. I thought I was just more hardcore and logical, and I thought was just bullshit aggressiveness, ego-centered-ness, powerplaying immaturity. I thought Se was essentially a function that was only useful for primitive apes, or people who were attracted to such.

What has changed? Se to me is related to "living your beliefs", that is, the day to day discipline. And I realized that, for the sake of progress at least, I have to live it every day. Whether that means I really am Se porl or not, I do not know, but Si atmosphere in terms of alpha is not appealing to me. It is too soft - for my purposes.


Also, I was so very sure of Ne as a creative function.

as creative was always there, but I always thought it came out in "justice" situations - it was something I was generally afraid of. But then...... seeing many LIIs - mostly Ne types, and seeing them so very airy, lightweight (as wikisocion says), things began clicking.


So really it is a combination of a few things

1 - isolation on my part, and a lack of involvement with other people, other situations. INTj also was the role most needed in my up brining, as, my entire immediate family needed Ne and its flexibility, and did not praise Se at all.
2 - intellectuality. I am not saying I am smart, I am saying I am interested in the mind, using it, analysis of concepts, and the like. Perhaps it should be noted again that I claim "to never read fiction books" - and this is true. It still and always have seemed like a waste of time, and not an creative sort of indulgence. Nevertheless, I have always been mentally curious.

I relate very well to the INTj concept of discovering universal truths. Also, Sjs I know are very into already established customs. I would like to be, honestly - I always said I would like to believe in something and sincerely be able to follow it, but my fixation on truth has lead me to not trust initially what I see -- mostly because its is not sound. So I have found myself slowly developing my own philosophy and codes, etc. It is not perfect, but, it is a work in progress and an interesting journey.

[Logos]

But you know, if you are an ISTj, maybe accounting is up your alley after all.

[UDP]

βitch.


Just playin with ya :wink: Hope your new Quadra suits you as well as this one has.

I am still not sure about really being beta. But perhaps that is me reacting to the stigma. Theoretically it lines up I suppose, but, I am one of the most anti-drama people you will find. I believe very much in pursuing an ideal.

I could see myself as a part of delta, but I am not sure how - I seem fairly IJ. Gammas are nice, but, it does not feel like me. Gamma seems quirky and odd, alpha seems childish. Beta dramatic. Delta...? Perhaps hypocrytical if anything. But as I write that it sounds like something wikisocion says

I am tired, very much so. More later

[Logos]

I am still not sure about really being beta. But perhaps that is me reacting to the stigma. Theoretically it lines up I suppose, but, I am one of the most anti-drama people you will find. I believe very much in pursuing an ideal.

I could see myself as a part of delta, but I am not sure how - I seem fairly IJ. Gammas are nice, but, it does not feel like me. Gamma seems quirky and odd, alpha seems childish. Beta dramatic. Delta...? Perhaps hypocrytical if anything. But as I write that it sounds like something wikisocion says

I am tired, very much so. More later

There are IJs in every quadra, so if you think that you are IJ and perhaps Delta, then you may want to look at the INFj.

[UDP]

The thing I am most certain about is being Tj.