INFj-ESTj dual relations discussion (EII-LSE)

[Beautiful sky]

First off they will get tense and wound up. Their tone of voice becomes dry and sharp not at all soft and concerned. They may say something along the lines of "I DON'T want to deal with this RIGHT now! I'm way too stressed. Shit's been bothering me all day and it's making my stomach hurt from thinking about it." "

I would respond with "I understand that talking about it will only make you feel worse. We don't have to mention unpleasant things. We can put it aside and maybe you can relax for the evening babe."

Their rants on the same will or may continue because they feel frustrated and haven't registered what I just said..."things are not going well for me right now" continue "this is why I don't deal with stuff like this" etc..."things at work are stressful; they haven't been going well."

I will then take a more direct tone saying "babe, not everything is stressful. It's not good to think about this right now." Then I will add something comforting. "I love you let me know if you feel better by the morning."

[Beautiful sky]

@Sol
Below you will find the interaction between a negativist and positivist dichotomies. Look for the rest of them. As is said proof is in the pudding

[Beautiful sky]

I'm not EII, so my opinion doesn't count, but I think it's best to just fight fire with fire in some of those situations. If they get angry because the walls haven't been scrubbed down to their specifications, get angry back at them and tell them to scrub the damn walls themselves if it pisses them off so much.

This is not a good approach. It would be better to quietly try again. If the LSE doesn't want you to they will tell you to stop. It's always good to try to take the load off of on LSE than give up, dump the work, and to move on. That's giving up.

Best to take pride and have pride in what you do no matter what it is.

[Sol]

By last 3 monthes I've seen already "INFJ" here wich appeared to be INFP - Fay, at least.
You need take into account that many of those wich think themselves as EII may to be other types easily and those wich they think as ESTJ may to be not ESTJ too.
As match in typing is <50% between anyone, you may be sure that not more than 25% of reports would be about EII - ESTJ. Practically much less than 25%. This makes the research with such organisation senseless.

To know real situation you need to type people yourself, as you can't trust to others' typings.

[Beautiful sky]

By last 3 monthes I've seen already "INFJ" here wich appeared to be INFP - Fay, at least.
You need take into account that many of those wich think themselves as EII may to be other types easily and those wich they think as ESTJ may to be not ESTJ too.
As match in typing is <50% between anyone, you may be sure that not more than 25% of reports would be about EII - ESTJ. Practically much less than 25%. This makes the research with such organisation senseless.

To know real situation you need to type people yourself, as you can't trust to others' typings.

Fay was new to Socionics and this site. Don't you understand when I tell you that Russian socionists typed me?

Never mind you are done. You can't be LSE unless you aren't a very smart LSE. I have to ask you to please stop paying attention to me and move onto someone else and don't respond to me. Thank you

[Emmym]

Disclaimer: If the LSE is unhealthy or there's a huge age gap between us, obviously, the power dynamic is offset so much so that it's not a relationship I feel responsible for. I've known a few older, basically sociopathic LSEs and I couldn't care less how they feel or what they think. I'm only speaking about LSEs close to my age who aren't Ann Coulter levels of crazy.

Usually, with LSEs, I just listen. Which is unusual, because I feel like I usually end up doing too much talking around some other types, especially Te-ego introverts (unless they get really into explaining something). LIEs and LSEs both have the effect of making me basically silent, but with LSEs it's actually fun because it seems like they can say what I'm thinking and keep me engaged in the conversation. They know when to be practical, when to be funny, and when to shut up, lmao.

When they're upset, I usually just let them blow off steam while listening and agreeing, giving input if I think they missed something important. They can talk literally for hours about what's bothering them and I wouldn't mind. Even if I'm not TALKING for hours about something that hurts me, I'm usually thinking about it for days, lol, so I don't begrudge them the time they need to deal with it.

Something I noticed is that whereas an SLI might say something really unpalatable and get defensive when I point it out, an LSE will actually take a step back, examine what I mean when I said it was unpalatable (if they say something really ignorant or cruel, for example) and apologize or verbally change their mind. ("Okay, so I wouldn't ever REALLY @#$% a baby..." lol) It's semantic but at times it can be important. I'm not saying, "LSE, you're a terrible person," just gently reorienting them towards less offensive behavior or towards what they really mean to say, which may be, "People are having too many babies." If they disagree and want to push the issue, I'm not usually bothered. I've noticed that Ti egos push the issue warily, as if they're hurting me by doing so, implying that I'm a worthless idiot for disagreeing with them, lmao.

[Beautiful sky]

Thanks @Emmym do you have any specific examples?

[Not A Communist Shill]

I would tell them to focus on the long term, and to not worry so much about petty everyday things. If they were feeling stressed generally (rather than for some specific incident), I would say it is best to focus on the most important one, two...three things etc., and they should attempt them right away rather than procrastinating or worrying about smaller priorities. Of course, if they are genuinely stressed for a long period of time, it would be constructive for them to take a proper break.

[Beautiful sky]

I would tell them to focus on the long term, and to not worry so much about petty everyday things. If they were feeling stressed generally (rather than for some specific incident), I would say it is best to focus on the most important one, two...three things etc., and they should attempt them right away rather than procrastinating or worrying about smaller priorities. Of course, if they are genuinely stressed for a long period of time, it would be constructive for them to take a proper break.

LSE don't like being told what to do

[Not A Communist Shill]

LSE don't like being told what to do

I think you need a certain uncertain mannerism where you say "You've been feeling sort-of stressed out lately haven't you...?" and/or saying that you feel great pain seeing them that way, and then suggesting that they still do things their own way, just with a different emphasis or timescale.

[Beautiful sky]

I think you need a certain uncertain mannerism where you say "You've been feeling sort-of stressed out lately haven't you...?" and/or saying that you feel great pain seeing them that way, and then suggesting that they still do things their own way, just with a different emphasis or timescale.

Your tactical is off. You said you would tell them what to do. How is that a suggestion?

[Not A Communist Shill]

Your tactical is off. You said you would tell them what to do. How is that a suggestion?

Does anyone like being told what to do in their area of expertise? I merely suggest that intuitively sense a person, and respond accordingly. It's what people do when they interact with others, is it not?

[Beautiful sky]

Does anyone like being told what to do in their area of expertise? I merely suggest that intuitively sense a person, and respond accordingly. It's what people do when they interact with others, is it not?

No. What you should say is "do you think..." "Would you feel...." "I would sa or do..."

[Not A Communist Shill]

No. What you should say is "do you think..." "Would you feel...." "I would sa or do..."

In my first post in this thread, I said "I would tell them to focus on the long term, and to not worry so much about petty everyday things".For example, in my fashion, I might say that "I think...you should focus on the long term more" or, "Don't you think you should focus on the long term more?". Much of human communication isn't just the message of what is said, it is what tone it is said in, and the context in which it is said...as well as body language of course.

[Beautiful sky]

In my first post in this thread, I said "I would tell them to focus on the long term, and to not worry so much about petty everyday things".For example, in my fashion, I might say that "I think...you should focus on the long term more" or, "Don't you think you should focus on the long term more?". Much of human communication isn't just the message of what is said, it is what tone it is said in, and the context in which it is said...as well as body language of course.

TELL THEM TO...not the same as "you may want to try to"

There's a difference in tact.

[Emmym]

I would tell them to focus on the long term, and to not worry so much about petty everyday things. If they were feeling stressed generally (rather than for some specific incident), I would say it is best to focus on the most important one, two...three things etc., and they should attempt them right away rather than procrastinating or worrying about smaller priorities. Of course, if they are genuinely stressed for a long period of time, it would be constructive for them to take a proper break.

So gentle, spoken like a true 9. You should see me going at it with a type 8 LSE! Ahaha! It's more like: "You're rude!" "No, you're rude!" And by the time anyone finds us the LSE is braiding my hair.

[Not A Communist Shill]

TELL THEM TO...not the same as "you may want to try to"There's a difference in tact.

You seem to be focusing on something very trivial. If you doggardly hound someone you are trying to help, rather than do all you can to offer advice in a way they'll appreciate, you are naturally doomed to fail.With you, it is not "one individual doesn't like being told what to do in the very specific way I've been doing it" or "LSEs don't like being to stop tasks they're in the middle of". but to say "All LSEs don't like being told what to do". It's an utterly empty statement. These are your terms, not mine. If one specific individual doesn't appreciate your attitude without actually going into any specifics, I don't think it wise to start arguing with someone who tries to help you about the particular weight or interpretation of the word "tell" in a sentence. You seem rather keen to take things at face value you when it suits you, while at other times being utterly unable to see generalised advice for what it is, even when especially nuanced. In addition, the idea that I or anybody else needs to explain the exact meaning of everyday words before they can make a post in a thread of this sort is ridiculous.

[Beautiful sky]

You seem to be focusing on something very trivial. If you doggardly hound someone you are trying to help, rather than do all you can to offer advice in a way they'll appreciate, you are naturally doomed to fail.With you, it is not "one individual doesn't like being told what to do in the very specific way I've been doing it" or "LSEs don't like being to stop tasks they're in the middle of". but to say "All LSEs don't like being told what to do". It's an utterly empty statement. These are your terms, not mine. If one specific individual doesn't appreciate your attitude without actually going into any specifics, I don't think it wise to start arguing with someone who tries to help you about the particular weight or interpretation of the word "tell" in a sentence. You seem rather keen to take things at face value you when it suits you, while at other times being utterly unable to see generalised advice for what it is, even when especially nuanced. In addition, the idea that I or anybody else needs to explain the exact meaning of everyday words before they can make a post in a thread of this sort is ridiculous.

What I'm getting at is that you don't consider carefully choosing words as to

as a creative (2nd) function (ILI and SLI)
It is manifested as a preference for factual accuracy over ideological consistency, and for objective, "harsh" communication over careful words that avoid a negative atmosphere. A view of the external environment being efficient, reasonable, and making sense is essential to their well-being and sense of inner peace, but they do not feel a pressing need for being proactive or productive themselves in that area.

It is most certainly not trivial. Words expressed a certain way give meaning, aim, rhyme, and reason.

[Not A Communist Shill]

What I'm getting at is that you don't consider carefully choosing words as to

as a creative (2nd) function (ILI and SLI)
It is manifested as a preference for factual accuracy over ideological consistency, and for objective, "harsh" communication over careful words that avoid a negative atmosphere. A view of the external environment being efficient, reasonable, and making sense is essential to their well-being and sense of inner peace, but they do not feel a pressing need for being proactive or productive themselves in that area.

It is most certainly not trivial. Words expressed a certain way give meaning, aim, rhyme, and reason.

I do not disagree with you on the way words are expressed...I disagreed with you making a great deal of fuss about one word in one paragraph in one thread about a topic of a general nature.

The way you have made a mountain of a molehill in this thread and missing the general point someone is trying to make in my view is exactly reminiscent of -leading, -seeking types.

Back to the topic at hand, I had assumed that you knew this LSE, and that you would know that in each dual pair (or indeed, in any constructive relationship), each individual values the other as a secret-keeper and confidant etc.. I would expect this individual to value your opinion, seeing it as coming from someone who is sincere and who knows them well. I do not see why anybody needs to be drawn into basic relationship advice and basic Socionics theory in a thread of this sort. I certainly do not see why individuals need to be drawn to comment on empty statements such as "LSE don't like being told what to do" either.

[Beautiful sky]

I do not disagree with you on the way words are expressed...I disagreed with you making a great deal of fuss about one word in one paragraph in one thread about a topic of a general nature.

The way you have made a mountain of a molehill in this thread and missing the general point someone is trying to make in my view is exactly reminiscent of -leading, -seeking types.

Back to the topic at hand, I had assumed that you knew this LSE, and that you would know that in each dual pair (or indeed, in any constructive relationship), each individual values the other as a secret-keeper and confidant etc.. I would expect this individual to value your opinion, seeing it as coming from someone who is sincere and who knows them well. I do not see why anybody needs to be drawn into basic relationship advice and basic Socionics theory in a thread of this sort. I certainly do not see why individuals need to be drawn to comment on empty statements such as "LSE don't like being told what to do" either.

In your country an EII self typing must be all the rage

[wacey]

He is EII, maritsa. You are not the only one.

Actually he is probably one of the better EII examples on this forums. And he has made a good point. But so have you. I think what is happening here is that he is better spoken when it comes to the writting, yet you also are making good points about LSE and are probably just looking for discussion. Just dont be so offensive when you hear people's answers and you would probably not run into these kinds of dead ends (you paint yourself into a corner a lot. )

[Not A Communist Shill]

In your country an EII self typing must be all the rage

of course your reasoning that I am creative in this thread is absurd.

[Beautiful sky]

of course your reasoning that I am creative in this thread is absurd.

Really? All you talk about is stuff that you read in the news. You don't try to mitigate relationships. You've been on this forum longer than I and my friend list far exceeds yours. Your social interactions are too tame and withdrawn pouting directly at fe polr

[Beautiful sky]

He is EII, maritsa. You are not the only one.

Actually he is probably one of the better EII examples on this forums. And he has made a good point. But so have you. I think what is happening here is that he is better spoken when it comes to the writting, yet you also are making good points about LSE and are probably just looking for discussion. Just dont be so offensive when you hear people's answers and you would probably not run into these kinds of dead ends (you paint yourself into a corner a lot. )

He's not and I don't think I'm the only EII here

[Not A Communist Shill]

Really? All you talk about is stuff that you read in the news. You don't try to mitigate relationships. You've been on this forum longer than I and my friend list far exceeds yours. Your social interactions are too tame and withdrawn pouting directly at fe polr

You seem to be saying I am not a because I am not on consistency in terms of the exact meanings of words (but you are!), so therefore I am a type...as though types have no such aptitude or concern for such matters.

You are using "friend" lists as an argument? I'm surprised that you, as a -type, would place such an emphasis on such showy displays of friendship. I'm also surprised you know how many "friends"...or contacts I have on this forum, seeing as even my "public" friend list is only visible to my contacts, and you're not one of them.

I currently have 112 "friends" on my list btw...including I think five joke accounts, and one individual who is on twice I think (Jack). You have 107. I believe only @Director Abbie has more "friends" than we do, and she is certainly a logical type.

When I co-owned the forum, I think I had 27 "friends" on my friends list, including four joke accounts. It was only when I recently returned that I started adding people more: chiefly so I could catch up posts I might otherwise have missed. When I was a forum owner, I felt I could not just add anybody onto my list I did not know at all well, lest I might be associated with any forum shenanigans etc. Even now, I will only have individuals on my list who I respect and who I do not consider fundamentally suspect.

I believe you, in your case, have posted many thousands of posts more than I have, and have been consistently here (I have not been here for extended periods). You have also many people on your friends list who you have fundamentally disagreed with and who have called you all sorts of names even...you also have a few nefarious individuals who other than being abusive, I would not even begin to consider to "friend" (I'm referring specifically to individuals who have been banned for various serious incidents over the years, or who in my opinion, should be banned. Further, having a long period of time intentionally not adding "friends" for what I saw as a necessary reason and not being here for long periods of time, there is also a smaller pool of possible people for me to add when I actually decided to change my strategy, only very recently.

I have previously said (and indeed others have said) that you seem very poor at picking up on the irritation others have shown towards you in the form of written communication etc. (I'm fairly certainly more people have you on ignore than any other). I find it thus ironic that you would consider me as being the one with PoLR. I doubt very few...if indeed any person who had encountered me would think I have PoLR. People on these boards are usually telling me I am almost (and actually) overbearingly affable and optimistic (at times)...and I'm usually having to tell them I don't display quite this energy in real life. (Although I think it is also true that individuals recognise that moods are a mixed bag). I also think most people would say that I display far more than , to the extent that it would barely need being demonstrated. I know your argument for me being ILI comes solely from a few of the several hundreds of photographs I recently posted of myself, as well as coupled with knowing that I identified with one or two Reinin traits that ILIs supposedly have. It is clear that after seeing my photos, you went straight to the Filatova photos thread framing the hypothesis (as Newton might say) "...anything but EII...anything but EII". I don't personally place much value in the VIing of photos, as you may know, but I did think that your avatar photo and your profile photo resembled the EIE individuals more than any other, with maybe IEI second (I even (subjectively of course) counted the number of strong similarities I saw, thus only coming up with a conservative estimate).

[Not A Communist Shill]

In your country an EII self typing must be all the rage

He's not and I don't think I'm the only EII here

this only confirms what I and others have observed over the years, that you jealously guard your EII status. Why else would you reply that way?

[Beautiful sky]

this only confirms what I and others have observed over the years, that you jealously guard your EII status. Why else would you reply that way?

I type it as I see it
I've made boarderline mistakes like ESE instead of SEE or IEE instead of ILE and now I'm more sure that you are SLI instead of ILI

[UDP]

Disclaimer: If the LSE is unhealthy or there's a huge age gap between us, obviously, the power dynamic is offset so much so that it's not a relationship I feel responsible for. I've known a few older, basically sociopathic LSEs and I couldn't care less how they feel or what they think. I'm only speaking about LSEs close to my age who aren't Ann Coulter levels of crazy.

This is entirely reasonable.

[quote]Usually, with LSEs, I just listen. Which is unusual, because I feel like I usually end up doing too much talking around some other types, especially Te-ego introverts (unless they get really into explaining something). LIEs and LSEs both have the effect of making me basically silent, but with LSEs it's actually fun because it seems like they can say what I'm thinking and keep me engaged in the conversation. They know when to be practical, when to be funny, and when to shut up, lmao.

When they're upset, I usually just let them blow off steam while listening and agreeing, giving input if I think they missed something important. They can talk literally for hours about what's bothering them and I wouldn't mind. Even if I'm not TALKING for hours about something that hurts me, I'm usually thinking about it for days, lol, so I don't begrudge them the time they need to deal with it.

Something I noticed is that whereas an SLI might say something really unpalatable and get defensive when I point it out, an LSE will actually take a step back, examine what I mean when I said it was unpalatable (if they say something really ignorant or cruel, for example) and apologize or verbally change their mind.

Some will, some won't.
I think emotional literacy and emotional intelligence is best kept very separate from socionics.

("Okay, so I wouldn't ever REALLY @#$% a baby..." lol) It's semantic but at times it can be important. I'm not saying, "LSE, you're a terrible person," just gently reorienting them towards less offensive behavior or towards what they really mean to say, which may be, "People are having too many babies." If they disagree and want to push the issue, I'm not usually bothered. I've noticed that Ti egos push the issue warily, as if they're hurting me by doing so, implying that I'm a worthless idiot for disagreeing with them, lmao.

The last sentence here is very interesting to consider.
It may be a Ti vs Fi deal.

[UDP]

Really? All you talk about is stuff that you read in the news. You don't try to mitigate relationships. You've been on this forum longer than I and my friend list far exceeds yours. Your social interactions are too tame and withdrawn pouting directly at fe polr

Citing friend lists is a pretty poor socionics practice in general.
Citing a small friends list for a 9w1 EII as reason why they are not EII
is even worse.


This is said for the general readership, and not that I expect the person who wrote this to particularly modify their viewpoint, or take what I said without chastising me in some way.

[poops magoops]

This is the most insane thread I have read on this forum.

[Not A Communist Shill]

Bene quod augetur cito. Hoc vere fori descenditur.

[Beautiful sky]

Disclaimer: If the LSE is unhealthy or there's a huge age gap between us, obviously, the power dynamic is offset so much so that it's not a relationship I feel responsible for. I've known a few older, basically sociopathic LSEs and I couldn't care less how they feel or what they think. I'm only speaking about LSEs close to my age who aren't Ann Coulter levels of crazy.

Usually, with LSEs, I just listen. Which is unusual, because I feel like I usually end up doing too much talking around some other types, especially Te-ego introverts (unless they get really into explaining something). LIEs and LSEs both have the effect of making me basically silent, but with LSEs it's actually fun because it seems like they can say what I'm thinking and keep me engaged in the conversation. They know when to be practical, when to be funny, and when to shut up, lmao.

When they're upset, I usually just let them blow off steam while listening and agreeing, giving input if I think they missed something important. They can talk literally for hours about what's bothering them and I wouldn't mind. Even if I'm not TALKING for hours about something that hurts me, I'm usually thinking about it for days, lol, so I don't begrudge them the time they need to deal with it.

Something I noticed is that whereas an SLI might say something really unpalatable and get defensive when I point it out, an LSE will actually take a step back, examine what I mean when I said it was unpalatable (if they say something really ignorant or cruel, for example) and apologize or verbally change their mind. ("Okay, so I wouldn't ever REALLY @#$% a baby..." lol) It's semantic but at times it can be important. I'm not saying, "LSE, you're a terrible person," just gently reorienting them towards less offensive behavior or towards what they really mean to say, which may be, "People are having too many babies." If they disagree and want to push the issue, I'm not usually bothered. I've noticed that Ti egos push the issue warily, as if they're hurting me by doing so, implying that I'm a worthless idiot for disagreeing with them, lmao.

What power dynamic?

[Emmym]

This is the most insane thread I have read on this forum.

Martisa is really into dragging people lately lol.

[Emmym]

What power dynamic?

The power dynamic inherent in all relationships.

[Beautiful sky]

The power dynamic inherent in all relationships.

I don't know of any power dynamic. In my unequal age relationships the discussion of certain things was off. For example when someone is in their mid 30s they may be talking about retirement investment. If they are with a 18 year old that person may not be because they may be thinking about school. That is not a power dynamic. If you are too busy looking at power stuff you may want to look into another type

[Emmym]

I don't know of any power dynamic. In my unequal age relationships the discussion of certain things was off. For example when someone is in their mid 30s they may be talking about retirement investment. If they are with a 18 year old that person may not be because they may be thinking about school. That is not a power dynamic. If you are too busy looking at power stuff you may want to look into another type

Relational power dynamics are a thing, even for Ne-egos and especially for Fi-egos. You may not want to acknowledge them as a thing, but they are, lol. I know multiple EIIs irl and we discuss power dynamics in relationships all the time. Doesn't have to be stereotyped Se "I'm gonna do this and you're gonna like it" power.

Besides, Se-polrs are not immune to power tripping, not at all. Having such a shitty grasp of Se means they'll either do nothing or go for your throat. Like you're doing in this thread, lmao.

[UDP]

Besides, Se-polrs are not immune to power tripping, not at all. Having such a shitty grasp of Se means they'll either do nothing or go for your throat. Like you're doing in this thread, lmao.

that was a thug life comment @Emmym


PS: wow that is the most misogynistic thug life compilation i've ever seen . .

[Emmym]

that was a thug life comment @Emmym


PS: wow that is the most misogynistic thug life compilation i've ever seen . .

Lmfao! That totally reminds me of the time I told an IEI friend I was 'street' and she responded "OH MY GOD, NO YOU'RE NOT!!!" She took it so seriously that I died.

[Beautiful sky]

- Being bossy
- Talking extensively about things that are trivial

I like those things about LSE

[The Reality Denialist]

I like those things about LSE

But why? I came off accidentally very bossy by making a comment to an EII. Instant action. I mean it was like robot like move. Me=.