What is your "dual" like?

[Gilly]

I think it would be a cool exercise for people to describe what they think of their real personality "dual," not just in the Socionics sense, but more like overall what your ideal partner is like personality wise, what they do for you, etc.

Personally, my ideal partner is easygoing but disciplined, someone who can keep me in line and down to earth, but without taking it too seriously. I need someone who can help me take myself less seriously, bring me down "out of the clouds," so to speak. I want someone who can see when I have an emotional outburst that it's just a phase, that I'll be over it as soon as I discharge, and that it really isn't necessarily representative of my feelings towards them unless it continues for a long period of time. I would hope that she can demonstrate that she can "take it," that it's not a huge deal if I have an outburst, so that I will feel comfortable being open about how I feel with her.

That said, I don't want my partner to just sit there and take abuse like a wall; she should stand up for herself, be as persistent as I am, so that she can really put a mirror up to my face and show me when I'm being ridiculous, without taking offense to what I say, because she should know by my persistent attitudes toward her that, no matter what I might say once or twice, I do care deeply about her, and that doesn't change just because we have a fight or I get all crazy.

My partner should have a passion for life and adventure. I like to get out and do ridiculous things once in a while, just to shake things up: go speeding down the highway, spraypaint some shit on a corporate building, go streaking, run around in the rain, go to wal-mart and do cartwheels in the aisles I would like a "partner in crime" for these sorts of things, someone who likes my goofiness and benefits from my spontaneity; I won't do these things alone, usually, but when there's someone to have fun with, I like to coax them into doing silly things with me. However I do get carried away sometimes (especially with speeding ) so it would be good if she had a sense of when things are going too far; if I have a moderator, I know that I can play the instigator without restraint, and know that, if I start being "too much," she will keep me in check, and know when to put her foot down.

My partner should be intellectually curious. I like to probe people's minds, test their intellectual limits, see if I can really push them to think about things. I would hope that my partner is well-versed in intellectual disciplines that makes her an interesting conversationalist and someone I can run ideas by without them going over her head.

I also want to be with someone who is sexually adventurous. I like to try new things, and I want to try more kinky shit; I am admittedly a little bit of a masochist, so having someone who is comfortable being in control would be good; however I like reciprocity and I want a feeling of total equality in a relationship, and I do like to take control during sex, whether it is to utterly dominate or to provide pleasure even to the level of servitude or worship, so she can't have such a big ego that she has to be in control all the time.

I would hope that my partner is more outgoing than I am, to some degree; I need the occasional push to get out and socialize, and it is almost always good when I just do it. That said, she shouldn't be TOO much more sociable than me; if she is constantly trying to drag me to social events, evenings out with friends, etc, I will (a) get finicky because I like my alone time, and (b) wonder if she really likes spending time alone with me.

It would be REALLY nice if she is proficient with things like doing taxes, financial planning, paperwork in general, etc but I can do these things easily, too, as long as I have a little push.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Someone who is more alike me than different.

Someone who is kind and caring and kind of emo. (like they're aware they're emo and don't care they're not actually emo and down, they're actually upbeat...just sensitive) Somebody who is sensitive and good with people. However, they also have to be very grounded in reality. Just not a 'tough' realist but a sweet one.

Somebody who has a good sense of humor about things and likes laughing about themselves.

Somebody who likes to talk and express their internal feelings. Somebody who doesn't really get much of a kick out of the external environment. Somebody romantic. Somebody that wants to understand and be understood.

Somebody who is just there for me. Somebody who can tease me playfully. I really enjoy that.

[crazedrat]

duality is a bunch of lies. don't believe it. no one will save you. the end

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Not to play devil's advocate, but that's pretty much how men's sexuality works. No matter how nice a guy a man is, sexually speaking we all pretty much act like perverted apes. 'A man would walk through puke, vomit and shit if there was a good piece of ass on the other side.' haha

As for solutions on this. I got nothing. Other than you really just have to train men. If they do something that annoys you, tell them directly and firmly and whack them on the nose with a newspaper.

Emotionally though- the genders are the same imo. Everybody feels. Everybody wants love. tv and media capitalizes on the feelings of women but men are just like that as well. As for asshole men, there are just as many psycho bitches.

I'm surrounded by dozens of neanderthals on a daily basis who have not had sex in months so hmm...yeah...it's slightly hard to meet someone who actually cares at all what you have to say or who you are other than being seen as one massive vagina.

Do you care what *they* have to say though? I mean I'll be honest. I rarely give a shit about what anybody says or who they are, and other people don't really give a shit about the 'real me' either. Because that's just not how people work, unfortunately. Come on Jessica. Let's say I was straight and interested in dating you. Would you care who I was? Would you care about all my personal interests and hobbies and how I defined myself? Or would you care that we found each other mutually attractive and if I could support you and just be there for you? You'd care how responsible I was towards you.

[Waddlesworth]

Not to play devil's advocate, but that's pretty much how men's sexuality works. No matter how nice a guy a man is, sexually speaking we all pretty much act like perverted apes. 'A man would walk through puke, vomit and shit if there was a good piece of ass on the other side.' haha

Bullshit.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Bullshit.

No. That's just how testosterone works. I guess you can mentally trick yourself to not act like how a natural man is supposed to act, but men's sexuality pretty much acts that way. Getting hard easily and being quick to shoot the semen is just a natural male impulse. It has nothing to do with psychology and everything to do with physiology. Being a good lover is a technique that you learn depending on how well you emotionally care about somebody.

Psychology is the thing that builds peace between the genders and shows us our human unity and shared interests more than differences. And of course, you can be personally bothered by your natural male sexuality and how it operates on a base level. Look at the priesthood. Because humans duh, have the potential and possibility to operate higher than a base level due to our brains.

And if a guy really cares, he'll prove it and show it, despite his natural male sexuality. But then again, it's the girl's job to prove her love too. Reminds me of the movie Stardust when the star told Tristan 'How is she proving her love to you?' when he was trying to impress that one girl.

[Waddlesworth]

No. That's just how testosterone works. I guess you can mentally trick yourself to not act like how a natural man is supposed to act, but men's sexuality pretty much acts that way. Getting hard easily and being quick to shoot the semen is just a natural male impulse. It has nothing to do with psychology and everything to do with physiology. Being a good lover is a technique that you learn depending on how well you emotionally care about somebody.

Psychology is the thing that builds peace between the genders and shows us our human unity and shared interests more than differences. And of course, you can be personally bothered by your natural male sexuality and how it operates on a base level. Look at the priesthood. Because humans duh, have the potential and possibility to operate higher than a base level due to our brains.

And if a guy really cares, he'll prove it and show it, despite his natural male sexuality. But then again, it's the girl's job to prove her love too. Reminds me of the movie Stardust when the star told Tristan 'How is she proving her love to you?' when he was trying to impress that one girl.

You're an idiot.

With, of course, the utmost respect.

[jessica129]

Do you care what *they* have to say though? I mean I'll be honest. I rarely give a shit about what anybody says or who they are, and other people don't really give a shit about the 'real me' either. Because that's just not how people work, unfortunately. Come on Jessica. Let's say I was straight and interested in dating you. Would you care who I was? Would you care about all my personal interests and hobbies and how I defined myself? Or would you care that we found each other mutually attractive and if I could support you and just be there for you? You'd care how responsible I was towards you.

That's what I'm talking about...that sort of thinking...It seems everyone shares that same attitude. I am being completley honest when I say that yes, when I first meet someone, I am genuinely interested in knowing who they are and what they're about. If I didn't care, I wouldn't ask them questions. I dont do it just to make conversation. I think that's where I feel really let down in my interactions with a lot of people as I'm always trying to get to know them more and know what they're about and they're content knowing nothing about me. I've spent 3 months in quarters the size of a kitchen with 40+ females and all they knew about me was that *GASP* I'm from Chicago *GASP*. Perhaps it's my own fault as I utterly and completely without a doubt hate talking about myself. But whatever. Some people enjoy talking to others just to talk about themselves. That's not me. If I ask you about you, I genuinely care 99% of the time or I don't ask at all.


and okay...wait...BD, are you saying when you're dating someone, you're not at all interested to know what the other's interests and hobbies are? What makes them tick? That seems a little self absorbed. When I'm intersted in someone, I thoroughly enjoy knowing everything about them.

[Waddlesworth]

and okay...wait...BD, are you saying when you're dating someone, you're not at all interested to know what the other's interests and hobbies are? What makes them tick? That seems a little self absorbed. When I'm intersted in someone, I thoroughly enjoy knowing everything about them.

BD is a homo masturbator. Why ask him for advice on this matter?

And I mean that as respectfully as possible.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

The personal insults are pretty uncalled for, don't you think?

Also you have yet to really prove how I'm wrong, so I don't think I'm an idiot.

And she didn't ask for my advice. I just gave her my opinion. I'm discussing things. It is a discussion board, right? *rolls eyes*

and okay...wait...BD, are you saying when you're dating someone, you're not at all interested to know what the other's interests and hobbies are? What makes them tick? That seems a little self absorbed.

I'm interested in what makes them tick, alright- but I have no interest whatsoever in their hobbies. For example, I'm usually into guys who are into sports and working out and stuff like that. However, me personally- I know nothing about jock-y stuff and really have no desire to. I'm much more of a geek. I figure they can talk sports with their buddies, if they are with me we are just more into each other romantically. I view your friends as people who have the same interests as you that you want to know more about. But for dating I am like 'opposites attract' usually, and I'm into guys with different hobbies than me. But I'm not into their interests at all.

[Waddlesworth]

The personal insults are pretty uncalled for, don't you think?

Also you have yet to really prove how I'm wrong, so I don't think I'm an idiot.

And she didn't ask for my advice. I just gave her my opinion. I'm discussing things. It is a discussion board, right? *rolls eyes*

You are a homo masturbator. You seem to be pretty proud of that. Good for you for being happy with your life. If I said "BD is a garbage eater" then maybe you'd want to take it personally or as an insult.

As for calling you an idiot. sorry, that's theory, just like socionics. I should have written a disclaimer.

[jewels]

Let's see...here are some random things. As far as what I'd want my "ideal" dual to be like.

They'd not want to be the center of attention. They would let me do things "my way" and not care if it was "structured" or "conventional." Wouldn't care if I was lazy one day and worked 12 hours straight running all over the city the next. I could be strong willed and persistent and they wouldn't care and would let me do my thing.

They'd be calm, not take things personally, not have hidden meanings in what they said (they'd mean exactly the words they said, blunt is good). They'd let me liven them up a bit.

They'd be supportive and grounding, letting me vent about random/funny people and situations that I find absurd or annoying -- but they'd know I don't really care ALL that much, I'm just venting and don't really hate anyone.

He'd be willing to travel long distances, do inconvenient/annoying things just to see me. He'd make sacrifices for me (personal ones, not like...goats).

The Fi relationship would be clear from things we'd both done/said. There would be stability there in knowing those feelings weren't likely to change (evolve, yeah, but not completely dissapear over night).

I wouldn't care if they did the same activities as me. They'd really just need to be there when I got home. I would like to take the dual with me out to activities, but only if they wanted to. Otherwise I could just see them later. Though I would want them to go to picnics I guess. Sometimes.

I would need to be able to be a combination of fiercely independent and at times a bit emotionally clingy (but just for a moment, until they reassured me), and then I'd be doing my thing again.

Being OK w/ me being moody, changing my approach slightly, and perhaps acting or being a bit different every day, or every hour, would be a good thing (not dramatically but I am different from time to time).

They'd need to be able to work out problems fairly bluntly by putting it all on the table and then coming to a fair compromise. We wouldn't have much routine and nothing would be "expected." Such as watching boring TV shows or needing to go bowling on a certain night...ICK. It would be OK to change or improve things whenever. Nothing stagnant. As many options let open as possible...such as getting a maid and a nanny so we could travel the world if we felt stir crazy (but still caring for the kids a lot too -- just the boring parts someone else could do).

They would help me become even more efficient, would find better ways to do things, help me carry heavy things, fix things, and have a spare key in case I get locked out. Help me fill out forms that give me headaches.

They'd let me talk...A LOT. They would like to listen. They wouldn't be conventional and would be emotionally supportive of all the random things I want to do. We would eat toast.

He'd be kind, rather brilliant. Probably some sorta introverted technical job that maybe he'd win crazy awards for but wouldn't tell anyone he'd won them. And they'd be collecting dust in some closet because who cares about gold stars. He'd be way smart but not pretentious. He'd make me laugh and be very reliable. He wouldn't be "artsy" or particularly creative. Maybe he'd be able to cook. He'd be sorta a wandering type person, very independent and strong, and he'd wander back to me without even trying.

yay.

[strrrng]

dual....

strong, grounded, knows when to correct me without being overbearing, sensitive and insightful, searching, motivated towards progressive action and substantial goals, certain of their beliefs and understanding of how things work, unmoving in the face of adversity, able to withstand my tumultuous bullshit because they see through it, not afraid to make the leap to attain unrestrained intimacy on all levels, willing to take large risks with me as a means to 'live for the other', tactically-minded, nonjudgmental appreciation of me -- 'scars and all', self-controlled impulsivity, pretty much a solid force who can accept their weak side and who possesses an undying passion for experience.

[munenori2]

My 'dual' is someone openminded about life. She makes things, regular old run of the mill things, seem new and more deep than I thought they were. She isn't conventional unless she's decided a convention is worth her choosing it for herself. She tends to question a lot of stuff I and other people often take for granted and comes to her own conclusions about whatever it happens to be. As a result, she's gotten together a completely novel, awesomely unique view of the world. She's alive and engaging in a way that shows a lot of curiousity, spontanaeity and not really giving a damn about what other people think. Someone I could mention the topic of philosophy and her eyes wouldn't glaze over nor would she start talking about The Secret or tell me that all I need to know about philosophy is in The Bible.

I'm a positive person, so someone that responds well to that. I like things to keep an upbeat feel. Obviously, if she were really critical or combative, that would suck. I need someone playful, inventive, easygoing who doesn't mind me if I get goofy or sappy or, and it will happen, sort of emo. She won't judge me or try to make sense of the way I feel. Someone who can appreciate that I want to express what I'm feeling, not sit down and talk it over. I can do this a tiny bit...but it's hard and really really awkward. If she can get it by all the things I like to do for her that's so much easier.

She wouldn't have weird physical boundaries, doesn't like freak out when she gets a hug or do that strange thing where you hug someone while maintaining the maximum amount of distance possible and somehow failing to exert any amount of pressure whatsoever. Fake hugs Sprawling out together on the couch or bed would be time well spent. She can relax with me without feeling like it's a waste of time or boring as hell. Likes to be touched. Less love is a battlefield and more love is a playground.

Someone not that clingy, but way more outgoing than I am. I need some alone time though so, in the interests of me not going insane, she's going to have to let me do my own thing from time to time.

Similar interests would be fantastic, smart, funny in a clever way, someone I can stare at for days, has unique talents I wouldn't have ever guessed, gets me into trouble, knows how to have fun and wants to have fun, wants kids, that's all I've got right now.

[mu4]

A man would walk through puke, vomit and shit if there was a good piece of ass on the other side.' haha

Naw....

We'll do this to show off to our friends maybe.

$$$ gets you this without all the hassle. Also you don't have to replace your clothing afterwords.

What you're talking about is social competition and alpha male dominance gamesmanship, not relationship building. It's competitive exercise amongst males, the female is merely a object. We retain this sort of greater primate behavioral characteristic because it opens doors to more diverse genetic material.

But we've moved past being monkeys and also deal with information as a characteristic of bonding rather then dominance and submission. Yea, it still is nice to have money, be the alpha male and get the girls hunting you, but more often people settle into a partnership for breeding and child-rearing. Also because of the amount of education and information we have to impart our children, unless we're overwhelmingly resource rich, it's takes dedication on the part of these partners to attain success.

[eunice]

My 'dual'.......

Someone who is a thinker and have a child-like curiosity and enthusiasm towards life, always looking forward to learning new things and gaining new experiences. He's witty and sharp, having the ability to learn fast and understand things easily. He strives to enjoy whatever he is doing and tries not to take things too seriously. He is someone who loves his family and enjoys the simple pleasures of life, and not been too concerned about title and prestige. He believes in work-life harmony and aims to spend quality time with his family and friends, and still have time for himself.

[iAnnAu]

jewels - Wow. I didn't think I'd have something to post on this thread, but basically, I'd like someone who'd like me to be the things you mentioned for him or her. Your post even mentions some of the things you'd be bringing to the table, so it even works to convey some of the things I'd want *in* a partner.

Also, mn0good, I also tend to attract guys who want me to "wear the pants." Yuck. I'm looking for someone who can match my verve, albeit in their own way; one of my least favorite things to do is make decisions for other people!

(and for a thoroughly biased and unasked for opinion, mune, your post screamed SEI waaaaay over EII)

[jessica129]

Mnogood, I basically agree with everything you wrote. Could never quite put it in such good words as you. I don't really attract those guys too often...when I do, ugh. No thanks get away. They don't seem to have any sort of personality or individuality to them.

[duality is cringe]

My dual is pure, undiluted jizz bomb.

[Wynch]

mn0good, iAnnAu and jessica129: I think you should wear the pants in important matters with no manners, because you're the logical types. About individuality (sense of humor & stuff, I believe), if the woman is the "right one" (and at least we have a clue of what that means) things come naturally, but with others men simply become clowns. You just try to squeeze something out but the whole result is an embarrassing situation, it's not even worth trying.

The issue is that if I'm going to win an argument or present the most valid case, I want there to actually be a discussion ahead of time. I want to wear the pants because I deserve to wear the pants, not because I've found the wimpiest man ever who will just do what I want. That's just plain boring, not to mention you then have no idea what your partner wants because they just seem to want to be you...

@mn0good: I was talking about such issues with 2 Canadian guys few y.a. on a software channel, and in the end they somewhat concluded they are forced by the society (or mentality) there to become "sissies". I think they were not inventing the problem, because I could see many times that in Canada the woman situation is an important matter, they have a lot of associations & stuff. Also, I heard that women have a higher priority, for example in the case of a divorce, the man has basically zero chances of winning the custody of the children. So basically the other extreme than the traditional society, but you should know better.
Maybe the percent of NGS men is too high in the area?
Afaik Sweden is in a similar situation, but I've been there and I did not have such impression.

I'm going to say no, from my observations I disagree. Yes about women typically having a better chance of winning custody battles, no to the rest of it. I think that's a ridiculous cop out, and I don't even find it reflects the nature of the men here. Again, there's a difference between accepting sensitivity and becoming a total pushover.

[mu4]

I'm going to say no, from my observations I disagree. Yes about women typically having a better chance of winning custody battles, no to the rest of it. I think that's a ridiculous cop out, and I don't even find it reflects the nature of the men here. Again, there's a difference between accepting sensitivity and becoming a total pushover.

Women are totally insensitive to men as a general observation, they just think they're sensitive. As a whole women are as self-centered and egotistical as men.

Accepting "sensitivity"(if even it's something real or new) has to go both ways, there's a lot of mixed messages being sent to both sides of the gender divide as we go thru this balancing phase.

As a whole this response denies the feelings that men are having concerning their role in relationships, and further complicate it by providing the mixed signal of "Accepting sensitivity" and "Total pushover".

In a sense this response symbolizes the sort of bullshit men have to weed thru to get to some sort of clarity on what bitchs want. Just flash that bling guys, the girls be hollering back.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Responsibility or stability or $$$, directness and confidence is still the way to go.

Yes it goes for both parties too. Otherwise the man will just treat the woman like a whore and the girl will let the guy and then feel guilty about it. (and the guy will inevitably feel guilty too.... if he has a conscience.)

It's not so much 'confidence' as asshole dick behavior but more like 'I am confident that I want to spend time with this person and devote myself to them.' That sort of thing. It's wanting to be with the person cause you really want to be there, not cause you feel you have to- because they're being nice. Being 'too nice' just makes people feel guilty. To me anyway.

Anyway, I don't really see people make LTR based on 'confidence' alone. That's a good trick to show your interest at first, and to pick a date- But longer term, you need something of more substance, because if you fall in love and decide to be together for awhile, A LOT of your weak spots are going to show no matter how confident you are. And how do you deal with those without wanting to rip each other's spines out?

[jewels]

jewels - Wow. I didn't think I'd have something to post on this thread, but basically, I'd like someone who'd like me to be the things you mentioned for him or her. Your post even mentions some of the things you'd be bringing to the table, so it even works to convey some of the things I'd want *in* a partner.

awesome! I actually felt sorta selfish or something writing that, despite it being true. There was a lot of "I want this!! AND That!!" sorta feel to it, but that's terrific to know it sounded somewhat realistic to someone! I sorta feel like I wrote "I'd someday like a 15 foot tall strawberry cake." And someone wrote back "great idea! someday I would like to build that cake!" LOl. So I guess duality works

mn0good, yeah, I agree about the nice guy syndrome thing. It's not so much that they're really "nice" but that they're trying to do "nice" things to get something back...you to like them, etc. People have gotta know they can be liked just because w/o fake nice things. I think girls do the same thing. It just feels less sincere than a real action of wanting to do something nice for someone. There's also a feeling of obligation and things being unequal and it's all just from insecurity that someone could like you and really know you w/o you doing these "nice things" to sorta "serve" them or whatever. But I guess it comes down to confidence, and taking the risk of someone not liking you. I'd bet that'd improve the nice syndrome thing.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

Random observation: has anyone described dual friends? Skimming through it seems everyone is referring to what their dual is like in terms of a relationship with a partner.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

I like people who protect others, who are the 'strong silent type.' I like people who can understand where I'm coming from, can tease me playfully- but also is a bit stronger than me. I like people who are serious, more serious than I am. I like people who can direct their anger in effective ways.

[ScarlettLux]

B&D - that sounds more like an LSI vs SLE. And yeah, I have always seen you as an EIE... so it makes sense. At least in my mind =P

[idolatrie]

He would be my comfort, my support, my partner, my delight. The person I would see first every morning, and fall asleep in his arms every night. He would love me best, and I would give him the (my, our) world. He would bring me joy, and pain, and sometimes it would feel like too much, but never not enough. I would not be able to think of love without thinking of him.

He would understand that sometimes I need to take care of him - to feed him and iron his clothes, put a blanket on him or rub his shoulders. This is my way of putting my touch on him, in a subtle way that lingers. He wouldn't resist this, or call attention to it, but just accept it. He would do things in return, bring me a cup of tea in bed in the morning, a text message at lunch, bringing pastries home for dessert - to show me that I am loved in return. He wouldn't effusively and vocally express his love in so many words, nor would he expect me to. But he would know. I would know.

He wouldn't set out to test me, ever. If we are at a party, and I look over and see him talking animatedly with some girl, her hand on his arm and an encouraging smile on her face, well, these things happen. But he wouldn't have a problem when I walk over, introduce myself and slip my hand into his back pocket. Sometimes I'll drink too much, and lean too close to other boys, chin propped up my hand and eyes at half mast. I'd expect him to slide his arm around my shoulders before any other boy's hand starts creeping up my leg. We wouldn't be joined at the him when going out, but we'd always be conscious of where the other is in the room. I could look up and catch his eye, and we'd just know, have some reaffirmation in that moment, then return to our own conversations.

He would touch me with certain hands. Possessively, as if I am something special. I would feel like I am precious within the circle of his arms. He would know that nothing is forbidden between us. He wouldn't ask for permission verbally, he would read my non-verbal cues. He would give me free reign over him and not hold back.

He would read my moods, know when to cheer me up, when to leave me be. He would not let me wallow in the morass of my emotions when I feel so entangled in them I could never escape. Nor would he smother me with his, knowing when to push and when to be contained.

He would be my escape from the world. The place where I can be vulnerable, small, not strong. He would know all my secrets, all my weaknesses, and I would never fear he would use them against me. I would trust him, and his judgment, unquestioningly. This would mean I take him seriously when we disagree, and expect us to work through problems rather than making snap judgments. If we had problems, I would hear them from him first, not anyone else.

He would surprise me, interest me, fascinate me. He would never be boring, staid, insignificant. He'd always be reaching for something 'more', some different perspective. We'd always be growing, transforming.

He would be my everything, and I would be his.

[Satan]

idol.. it sound; like you want a dog

[idolatrie]

idol.. it sound; like you want a dog

given your avatar, should I take that as a come on, babe?

also, not really, I mean, I don't want slavish devotion or anything. maybe I didn't make it clear, but I want equality above all else.

[ragnar]

He would be my everything

The sentiments you outlined are a sure recipe for disaster, IMHO. I thought very much like that too in more idealistic days, though.

I still agree that "something" - as opposed to the depressingly common "nothing" - is the proper thing for the husband and wife to be wrt each other. But not "everything" in the way you described.

[redbaron]

The sentiments you outlined are a sure recipe for disaster, IMHO. I thought very much like that too in more idealistic days, though.

I still agree that "something" - as opposed to the depressingly common "nothing" - is the proper thing for the husband and wife to be wrt each other. But not "everything" in the way you described.

well you're different so of course you'll want something different in a marriage. I mean, not everyone wants the same thing. I've seen lots of successful marriages that look and feel VERY different depending on the partners involved. So all you're basically saying here is that you don't want to marry idolatrie. :tongue:

[redbaron]

What I think is unrealistic in her writing is the mutual expectation (to be in turn the partner's center of the universe as well, because a complementary partner should look to things "mechanically", right?), but normally they can't notice if the relationship is fine and the guy is content and faithful.

Ha. maybe so. I could see that. I'd be SO okay with that. You look to things "mechanically" and I'll provide the adoration.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

My dual if it's a female is probably one of the few people that I can be bothered with in a long term relationship. If it's a male dual, which would for me just be friendship, I find them to be a little.. temperamental is perhaps the word, and a bit too different at times. Of course these are generalisations but it's typically true. I think sexual attraction is a real cementer for psychological compatibility with someone who's similar but yet so different like a dual.

For same sex friends, I usually find my activator a better match than my dual. Probably because we are both introverts so our general approach to activities and social groups is more similar.

ESTj's as friends have usually been the ones who've encouraged me to broaden my horizons, with our similarities but their comparatively more extraverted tendencies.

[Eldanen]

If anyone meets a male ISFp-Fe with a brain, let me know.

[Enters Laughing]

God, I'd love a dual with a brain we could share between us.

[munenori2]

God, I'd love a dual with a brain we could share between us.

Your prayers have been answered, friendo!

[ScarlettLux]

Aww NUMBERS <3 so freaking cute and so freaking Beta.

I'm finally gonna attempt my best at answering this very difficult question. I actually avoided this, dunno why. Trying to write it w/o bias or anything so here goes --

My dual is someone who is passionate. I think that's the most important thing for me. Passion to me is intensity, it's like... someone that is down for the most random things, adventures and the like... w/o a second thought. It's also an inner chasm filled with the je ne sais quoi that I feel from certain people that I meet, a very select few, mind you.

When I look at my dual, I wanna feel like... with this person, anything and everything can be accomplished. I want to be merged with them, entirely. I want to feel every drop of emotion that they have... I want them to pour it all over me. A torrent of emotion...

That being said, my dual obviously cannot be entirely 'logical' persay... they are ruled by their hearts, not their minds. I don't want anything hidden, emotion wise. I want to feel the depth of it all.

My dual should be able to sweep me away, make me forget about worries... anxiety and other such things. They should be able to calm, to soothe a high maintenance person like me. Preferably, they should be a rock for me to lean against. Yet that rock should also have a softer side.

Blah. I think I want a hybrid INFp-ESTp.

[redbaron]

If anyone meets a male ISFp-Fe with a brain, let me know.

my dad.

[Banana Pancakes]

If anyone meets a male ISFp-Fe with a brain, let me know.

Actually they can be quite smart, and when years of Fe seeking turn you into a dumbass, their Ti seeking has been absorbing info the whole time, which they remember pretty well, and suddenly they're smarter than you.

[Eldanen]

Actually they can be quite smart, and when years of Fe seeking turn you into a dumbass, their Ti seeking has been absorbing info the whole time, which they remember pretty well, and suddenly they're smarter than you.

Really?