ILEs are very in your face. Moreso than IEEs actually (though less so than SLEs), because as Fi-PoLRs they have serious trouble telling when they're being rude or intrusive, or even caring. Being direct is not an argument for IEE over ILE (and LSE is still patently ridiculous), it's an argument for SLE over ILE.
Did you dislike the movie, Glam?
What do these signs mean—,
, etc.? Why cannot socionists use symbols Ne, Ni etc. as in MBTI? Just because they have somewhat different meaning. Socionics and MBTI, each in its own way, have slightly modified the original Jung's description of his 8 psychological types. For this reason,
Just one example: in MBTI, Se (extraverted sensing) is associated with life pleasures, excitement etc. By contrast, the socionic function(extraverted sensing) is first and foremost associated with control and expansion of personal space (which sometimes can manifest in excessive aagression, but often also manifests in a capability of managing lots of people and things).
For this reason, we consider comparison between MBTI types and socionic types by functions to be rather useless than useful.
-Victor Gulenko, Dmitri Lytov
iirc, Juno doesn't really say offensive or rude things? and she doesn't get up in people's faces either.Originally Posted by Aleksei
why is LSE so ridiculous?
nah, it's alright.Did you dislike the movie, Glam?
I like these.
I would choose Vanessa as ESE more than LSE for a beneficiary/benefactor relationship between Mark and her rather than activity. From my experience, Mark's feelings toward Vanessa and her feelings toward him seem prototypical of what goes wrong in Benefactor/Beneficiary and how such a socionics relationship will fall apart.
So your theory is Mark is the beneficiary? That seems off -- Mark seemed to be the one being squeezed.
I would also prefer Mark as ILE over Vanessa as ESE. She seems more rigid than I generally think of ESEs as being.
The proposal is interesting though...
What do these signs mean—
Just one example: in MBTI, Se (extraverted sensing) is associated with life pleasures, excitement etc. By contrast, the socionic function
For this reason, we consider comparison between MBTI types and socionic types by functions to be rather useless than useful.
-Victor Gulenko, Dmitri Lytov
Yes, the beneficiary is the one that is benefiting and can become greatly disillusioned with the other partner.
Yeah, ILE/LSE could work too. Maybe I'm far off though, when I saw the film I didn't even know about socionics theory so I'm trusting my memory to be impartial about it.I would also prefer Mark as ILE over Vanessa as ESE. She seems more rigid than I generally think of ESEs as being.
The proposal is interesting though...
I remember her character having the 'pants in the family' role, but at the same time wanting to fit a motherly role of caregiver, as if the role was something she had to force herself to do (Te role function?). She had an entertainer's way about her when they visited her. LSEs can become a bit more egotistical in their entertaining with people, as if to herd everyone to their own Te-Fi agenda rather than have a merry exchange with someone. ESEs will worry to some extent about this and become uncomfortable during the exchange if they believe this isn't happening. LSEs don't seem to care as much about this, but instead about whether or not people directly voice what it is that they don't like or do; if no one speaks about up directly about something they feel everything is fine.
I really like IEE/ESE for them, but I shouldn't expect you to agree. I've changed typings before after learning more, so that's pretty much it. I'm also kind of basing the similarity of that relation to the benefactor/beneficiary relationship I had/have with an LSE.
I wanted to like this movie but I was so disappointed. The whole thing consisted of Juno making witty comebacks to everything, it was so irritating. It was like they were trying entirely too hard, sort of like watching Gilmore Girls only even more annoying, if that's possible.
More like ILI-Ne amirite.
More like EII-Te amirite.
More like SLI-Ne amirite.
More like ESI-Fe amirite.
Flick is delta.
Juno I think is IEE.
Why IEE?
Because a ILE would get a anonymous abortion, never tell anyone and barely have a bad night sleep about it. There sure wouldn't be much movie material.
-Polr
I've seen it a long time ago, a friend recommended me it. Not that bad.
I completely agree with this -- everyone kept going on about how good it was, but when I saw it I was just disappointed. And the dialogue... ugh. Definitely Gilmore Girls-esque.
I don't have opinions on the characters' types... just thought I'd throw in a bit of nonconstructive criticism of the movie, which sucked imo
Yes.
Nah. ILEs can be snarky attention whores (which she is -- the entire movie is Juno saying LOOK AT MEEEEE). Further, her point was that she was IN WUVVVVVV AND GAVE UP THEIR SEED WAAAAAH, which can easily result from xLE-xEI duality. The xLE turns into a sap, defying logical explanation.Juno I think is IEE.
Why IEE?
Because a ILE would get a anonymous abortion, never tell anyone and barely have a bad night sleep about it. There sure wouldn't be much movie material.
But most importantly, Bleeker is not SLI, and their relationship is not rocky enough for them to be semi-duals.
What do these signs mean—
Just one example: in MBTI, Se (extraverted sensing) is associated with life pleasures, excitement etc. By contrast, the socionic function
For this reason, we consider comparison between MBTI types and socionic types by functions to be rather useless than useful.
-Victor Gulenko, Dmitri Lytov
ILE's are not the only attention seeking types. IEE is just as attention seeking and likely better at it then ILE's.
ILE's are often reclusive but we do enjoy recognition for our accomplishments, ideas, thought. This is key, because many types seek recognition but why and how is far more important in socionic typing. ILE's do not seek recognition for something personal like a child, making a decision about abortion/adoption, and these ethical decisions. These are kept completely to ourselves and perhaps with someone wholly trusted. In contrast, these sort of verbalization are often conveyed by our duals (SEI) who have no problem making sure everyone who should know does know how the relationship is going.
This character also is quite confident in dealing with the familial ramifications of her pregnancy, where as ILE would absolutely have trouble dealing with this from a familial and authoritative level.
Bleeker isn't really a fully fleshed character, more a sperm donor with dialogue, so I won't type this character.
I want to note that I think Ellen Page is ILE, and this influences the portrayal of the character.
Last edited by mu4; 01-04-2011 at 01:42 PM.
I like the Juno=LSE and Bleeker=EII theory.
I don't think she's an attention whore in that film - she actually seems to roll her eyes at that sort of behaviour sometimes. I think the way she is an aficionado for various things while also seemingly being a bit of a busybody and generally competent in everyday matters would fit in with LSE with a Si Ego and Ne HA, rather than a Ne-dominant who is Si-seeking.
The way she is swayed outside the abortion clinic and by Bleeker's lines later on could be evidence of Fi-seeking behaviour.
interesting, I shall have to re watch it again sometime. Perhaps I'm just seeing ILE coming from Ellen Page more than the actual character, which is the downside of typing film and TV characters
EII INFj
Forum status: retired
Juno: ILE
Bleeker: SEI
･ﾟ*✧ 𝓘 𝓌𝒾𝓁𝓁 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒶𝒸𝒸𝑒𝓅𝓉 𝒶 𝓁𝒾𝒻𝑒 𝓘 𝒹𝑜 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒹𝑒𝓈𝑒𝓇𝓋𝑒 ✧*:･ﾟ
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote