Being fought for & pursued (delta NFs)

[UDP]

A lot of delta NFs seem to happen into relationships because someone 'wants' them.

And as we know, sometimes Delta NFs don't make the best relational choices in terms of ending up with people who are actually good for them.

I'd like NFs to comment on the nature of being pursued by someone, and feeling wanted, and how that impacts your feelings about relationships, especially personal ones.



Everybody enjoys being pursued somewhat, I know. But delta NFs have this interesting mixture of not wanting to be too strong, but, still being very influenced by 'how much someone wants them'.

[Simon Ssmall]

I dont think Im that affected by being pursued. I prefer the pursuing instead. I guess thats an extrovert male thing. With that said I dont mind the attention or when I can see someone likes me. There were even times when the fact someone liked me was enough for me to start the relationship, well it didn't last long. All in all, feeling pursued is a turn-off for me, feeling wanted is something that brings positive emotions and could influence my own feelings, however that alone I dont think is enough.

[Galen]

I dont think Im that affected by being pursued. I prefer the pursuing instead. I guess thats an extrovert male thing. With that said I dont mind the attention or when I can see someone likes me. There were even times when the fact someone liked me was enough for me to start the relationship, well it didn't last long. All in all, feeling pursued is a turn-off for me, feeling wanted is something that brings positive emotions and could influence my own feelings, however that alone I dont think is enough.

Same here. Despite me being quiet and unobtrusive I find myself more comfortable in approaching others for the sake of relationships. I guess I don't mind being "pursued" though (even though it sounds like a stalker term) so long as I know I like the person doing the pursuing. It's all highly dependent on who the other person is and how I feel about him.

It seems like something much more dependent on extrovert/introvert and not necessarily Ne + Fi.

[April]

Yeah, I strongly relate to what you're talking about in the OP. Friends have commented that I tend to "go along" with guys who fall for me. I'm uncomfortable talking about it, though, partly because I don't fully understand it. I could say it relates to my father's absence in childhood and fearing rejection, or perhaps a sign of low self-esteem, but it's all speculation. Hmmm... or maybe it's not so neurotic after all. *I want you to want me. I need you to need me. I'd love you to love me. I'm begging you to beg me.*

[UDP]

Yeah, but, you two are also guys....

Especially lobo and all some other male NFs, any sort of 'femininity' talk or being un-manly tends to freak you guys out, so I wouldn't expect you to say much. (that's a slight joke)

I suppose the post is more tailored to women. (?)

[UDP]

Yeah, I strongly relate to what you're talking about in the OP. Friends have commented that I tend to "go along" with guys who fall for me. I'm uncomfortable talking about it, though, partly because I don't fully understand it. I could say it relates to my father's absence in childhood and fearing rejection, or perhaps a sign of low self-esteem, but it's all speculation. Hmmm... or maybe it's not so neurotic after all. *I want you to want me. I need you to need me. I'd love you to love me. I'm begging you to beg me.*

I've seen this in IEEs and EIIs.

Espcially neeed you to need me . . .

[Suz]

Yeah interestingly I tend to develop feelings faster for someone if i've gotten some signs from them that they might be attracted to me. They could even be subtle signs that i'm not 100% sure about. In fact if the signs are strong enough that i'm 100% sure and more, that means they're coming on way too strong, and at that point I'm thinking they just want to use me. So, that scares me off.

[Galen]

Especially lobo and all some other male NFs, any sort of 'femininity' talk or being un-manly tends to freak you guys out, so I wouldn't expect you to say much. (that's a slight joke)

Well hey, you asked for Delta NF thoughts and you got them . Honestly though, a lot of it depends on who's doing the pursuing, because if it's someone I don't particularly like I'm not going to go with it.

The gay part may play an extra role, because I mean what homosexual male wouldn't want to be swept off his feet by an active masculine figure?

[Words]

A lot of delta NFs seem to happen into relationships because someone 'wants' them.

And as we know, sometimes Delta NFs don't make the best relational choices in terms of ending up with people who are actually good for them.

I'd like NFs to comment on the nature of being pursued by someone, and feeling wanted, and how that impacts your feelings about relationships, especially personal ones.



Everybody enjoys being pursued somewhat, I know. But delta NFs have this interesting mixture of not wanting to be too strong, but, still being very influenced by 'how much someone wants them'.

I'm not aware of this phenomenon.

[anndelise]

I've done my share of pursuing and being pursued. (I wasn't always this fat.)

When I was pursuing, the momentum was kept up by responses from the other person. Were they accepting of each step, and how far would they let me go. I want to be wanted (not needed). If they showed signs of not wanting me back, then no sense in continuing the pursuit.

But I've also enjoyed being pursued, at least temporarily, usually for things like one night stands, or if I really like the person. The ISTp pilot I've mentioned a few times pursued me in just the right way, which is probably why I still have a crush on him. There was no doubt that he wanted me...when he wanted me, heh. But I wasn't very pulled together at that time.

I pursued Richard, pretty much at the moment I set eyes on him. Of course, that I'd seen his profiles and posts on a forum I was also a member of, helped, even if his profile didn't interest me at the time. But the familiar face in unfamiliar territory (a meeting of said forum type people) provided me with the compulsion to rush over and say hi.

After that, we pm'd each other, then chatted, then I finally got him to call (he hated phones with a passion), got him to my bday party, and from there the pursuit was intensified. I knew I wanted him in my life. He was quite responsive. We were compatible in many ways. And within 3 months he was living with me. We've been together for over 6 1/2 years now.

As an extrovert, I think we are likely to initiate contact, more so than introverts.

As an Ne base, we are more likely to consider the idea or possibilities of a new relationship, different ways it can go, etc. Experience will either confirm or bring up new possibilities to consider.

As NeFi, we are quite curious about the inner workings of a person. If the person 'puts out' a lot of information, quickly, the curiosity is satisfied too fast, and something else catches our attention. Or, the info is of such that builds on itself as time goes on, maintaining our curiosity and potential. If it takes time before personal information is given to us, and in only bits at a time, the curiosity usually remains (if the info is interesting enough), and then attachment begins to set in.

So no, I don't see the OP as applying to "delta nfs". Maybe to delta extroverts, but even then i'd doubt that too, as some istps will pursue (at least for a one night stand).

Of course, it could have nothing to do with socionics, as well.

[ashlesha]

I'm not aware of this phenomenon.

me either.

i've historically preferred situations where i knew the guy was interested but i was the more influential one in moving things forward. i don't want to feel like i'm being swept along and am not an active agent in it. it's like if i'm being pursued i have to question whether its something i want or not. but if i am the one moving things forward then there is no question.

i'm a female introvert... but out of all the responses here, i relate to galen and ssmall the most. hmm.

i do also relate to anon about developing feelings faster for someone if there are signs that they might be attracted to me. but that's not really the same as them "pursuing" me. eh.

[Beautiful sky]

A lot of delta NFs seem to happen into relationships because someone 'wants' them.

The personal relationships that I have established in the past were with men that I found compatibility with. There were periods of time were I saw myself with this person, that I thought we had good communication and understood each other well enough to build a good foundation and set mutual goals and be able to support ourselves and a healthy life style, spending our lives together, as friends and lovers. My X -SLI BF and I was very driven and ambitious and he built a business all by himself. When I first met him, he was confused and disoriented about his opportunities and needed some potential insights into situations where he could use these options to pursue something worthwhile. I augmented and supplemented the of course by offering interesting options, ideas and seeing how these things would develop. So we were together, we wanted to be in a relationship and neither one of us needed each other for any sort of reason, be it emotional loneliness or financial, even though I do not consider financial dependence as a need.

And as we know, sometimes Delta NFs don't make the best relational choices in terms of ending up with people who are actually good for them.

This is not true in my case. My relationships were good for me. However, the relationships did not fully come together, because they were not a complete, a whole, like duality is. None of my past relationship were with duals.

I'd like NFs to comment on the nature of being pursued by someone, and feeling wanted, and how that impacts your feelings about relationships, especially personal ones.

I am terrified of being "pursued"; I don't like the feeling of being acquired, like, being striven to be possessed. I don't like it when someone calls me constantly, when someone shows up at my door without my invitation....It's so scary. I very much like a relationship that starts slow, with conversation, and getting to know the person over a period of months before we have or establish a relationship. That way, I can gauge the intellectual level of the person and see if they can develop an interest in the things that I am interested in, not all things, but some, to share my life with them.

Everybody enjoys being pursued somewhat, I know. But delta NFs have this interesting mixture of not wanting to be too strong, but, still being very influenced by 'how much someone wants them'.

I absolutely do not like being pursued. I love gentle courting. Show interest in me by taking me to coffee, having long conversations with me; try not to touch me and scare me for a while. I love to hold hands, for that very same feeling of protection/protected.

[Mattie]

I think you're finding a correlation in something else. This might just be me, but I've noticed that whenever you post questions about NeFi and FiNe, you always are talking about women, and I find that you saturate a lot of stereotypical feminine traits into how you talk about them. And it's not just you, I think a lot of people assume all Fx types are more likely feminine (curiously enough, the forum sees the Beta Fx types as primarily male, and Beta [I think Gamma as well, sometimes] a more male quadra, but I don't think there's a feminized quadra) and therefore take some traits not related to Socionics but related to gender and gender roles and apply masculine ones Tx types (the Tx-leads tend to be the 'butch'/'lesbian' types [particularly TeNi] for women) and feminine ones to the Fx type (the Fx-creatives are seen as the 'gay' types [particularly NiFe and NeFi] for men). When it comes to the discussions in the Delta forum, I usually see a reinforcement of traditional gender roles rather than type when it comes to relationship talk.

Now, while not all men do the chasing and not all women are the chased, this is the societal expectation and is the default when it comes to heterosexual relationships (which is all that is really mentioned here as well). Men generally feel pressured to do the chasing and women aren't bewildered when they are chased. This is because men are seen as the more active, initiating force overall in society, while women are more passive and the choosers. From my experience, no matter what the type of the male is, the more I withhold and have my attention diverted elsewhere, the more interested and determined the man pursing me is. The moment I go on a date or meet up or whatever, even if it's very successful, the effort plummets. Every single time, even with those I steadily dated. So, all of that being said, I don't think the OP is really getting at anything type related, or at least, SOLELY type related. Some intersectionality has to be looked at.

I also don't know what you mean by this:

And as we know, sometimes Delta NFs don't make the best relational choices in terms of ending up with people who are actually good for them.

How is that NeFi and FiNe specific at all? Something like this isn't type related, it's a maturity thing, as well as being subjective with who you think is 'good' or 'bad' for another person.

As for me, I don't find myself in relationships just because people like me. If there's a doubt in my mind about how I think the compatibility is, I won't give in to someone just being interested. For the times I stuck it out with someone who wasn't the best, it was because I perceived the steps that would solve the relationship issues, but for some reason we were never able to go down that path. As to being chased or the chaser, I wish there was no designated role like that, because that seems like a game to me. That someone has to do the initiating while the other does the withholding. In this respect, I do like being the chased when I have half of the control of things going on; but this isn't usually the case. In my experiences, when you're the chased, you don't really choose when the chasing stops, or when the chasing happens, it just comes and goes whenever it wants. To me, that's frustrating, especially when people just drop out without warning; I enjoy the attention and someone actively trying to get me out, but I find that these motives are shallow as to just obtain my time, and not really the actual interest they have in me. Once they have my time, or whatever they want, they can choose to stop chasing. So I would say I tend to be a more balanced 'chaser,' I like initiating things and making things happen, but I also want the person to be as responsive and excited as I am. I think overall, people want there to be this balance, because the more you force yourself into the role of chaser and chased, it's a game and not genuinely liking the other person, just seeing them as an object to be obtained by using a particular strategy.

[UDP]

My reaction as I read the thread this morning:




*sigh*

[ashlesha]

As to being chased or the chaser, I wish there was no designated role like that, because that seems like a game to me. That someone has to do the initiating while the other does the withholding.

to all of your post, but mostly this.

My reaction as I read the thread this morning:




*sigh*

why?

[DirectorAbbie]

A lot of delta NFs seem to happen into relationships because someone 'wants' them....Everybody enjoys being pursued somewhat, I know.

I suppose the post is more tailored to women. (?)

Women expect to be persued. It's awkward for the female to persue. Everyone wants to be wanted.

Males, extroverts, feelers, and sensors should have an easier time doing the persuing. Thus female Delta NFs are some of the least likely to be the pursuer.

[golden]

Yeah, all of that. Part of why I think the romantic attitude things are blown out of proportion, considering that males of any type tend to adopt something like the "Caretaker/Aggressor" role and females tend to have the "Victim/Infantile" role.

I definitely think that gender roles, social dynamics, and culture circumscribe the romantic-attitudes stuff. Another complication is that over the short term these dynamics may be less obvious, only to appear over the long term. Both within a relationship and at the individual level.

Having gradually unleashed my "inner victim" entirely, and having often experienced the difference between a partner playing out his predefined gender role vs. exploring some strong personal preferences ... I'd say "romantic attitude" may be pretty important.

[Gilly]

I think you're finding a correlation in something else. This might just be me, but I've noticed that whenever you post questions about NeFi and FiNe, you always are talking about women, and I find that you saturate a lot of stereotypical feminine traits into how you talk about them.

Yes. It's because he's not LSE but rather LII, and is attempting to decipher the social contract using Ti.

[ashlesha]

if we're talking about the romance styles, infantiles aren't described as being receptive to being "fought for and pursued," as far as i know.

Typical characteristics of the Infantile romance style
interest is sparked in partner with positive aesthetic attributes divorced from active, "aggressive" sexuality
tend to try to attract partner's interest with joking, goofy or even "strange" behavior
try to help partner see the unexpected and fun side of things
interest is maintained or cools off according to partner's response to this behavior
appreciation for partner who actively cares about the individual's comfort and daily needs
neutral with regard to externally admitting who took the initiative in ending a relationship, "power" is seen as unimportant in such matters

This romance style is defined by focus on which is static, irrational, and extroverted, with perceptions focused on possibilities and alternatives to the static present reality, which the individual perceives as intrinsically boring and stagnant. This means that an Infantile sees attraction between two individuals as a static state, also from the point of view of the other person, which he tries to "get moving" by actively thinking of variations of the present static state. This accounts for an Infantile's inclination to focus on the mutual attraction, or particularly the attraction felt by the other person, as connected to that person's being exposed to the unexpected, imaginative, fun, even "weird" side of life, reality, and each other, a behavior that can be described as "childlike". This focus leads to a sort of helplessness regarding his own physical well being as perceived by , so he welcomes help from others in that area.

[Beautiful sky]

I'm NOT receptive to being "fought for and pursued" this is BS. This is so stupid.


I'm a humanist by nature; that means, I prefer softer approach. I don't joke, goof or have "strange" behaviors, either. I'm soft and mellow.

Wikisocion is so incorrect and WRONG on so many levels it makes me feel so terrible even reading such inaccuracies.

[Park]

i've historically preferred situations where i knew the guy was interested but i was the more influential one in moving things forward.

Works for me.

[Park]

Oddly enough, my most recent conversation with a close ILE friend was about whether girls in general expect guys to be the ones who move things forward, and if a guy is usually considered weak, stuck-up, or incompetent if he doesn't take the initiative and lead the way.

I personally feel at relief in a supportive tag-along position. Which does not imply passivity or any sort of blind compliance on my part, but a more easygoing and "contributing" - rather than leading or controlling - attitude towards the progress of the relationship.

[blankblank]

Well, I relate to the OP's post. The more someone wants me, the less hard it is to get them to want me more, and therefore the more I'm interested in them.

On the flip side, the more they want me, the harder it is for me to leave them. That was what happened in my last relationship. At first, she wanted me, and I wanted her, and I pursued her because she pursued me. But after a while I didn't want her at all, but she still really wanted me. I tried to deny my disinterest to please her. It was ugly.

[blankblank]

Wikisocion is so incorrect and WRONG on so many levels it makes me feel so terrible even reading such inaccuracies.

I dislike the romance style descriptions, too. I relate so much to the "victim" role but I'm not EIE, IEI, LIE, or ILI. If people I date are ever interested in socionics and read wikisocion they'll be made to think I'm soooo self-assured and trusting.

[golden]

So to Maritsa and Random Ness (or anyone who'd care to comment), what do you think would constitute a better description of the "romance attitudes"? And, backing up a step, do you think that the constructs identify something valid?

[ashlesha]

So to Maritsa and Random Ness (or anyone who'd care to comment), what do you think would constitute a better description of the "romance attitudes"? And, backing up a step, do you think that the constructs identify something valid?

i think the descriptions on wikiscocion point to something that exists but are way exaggerated. i mean, goofy or strange behavior sounds like something sort of embarrassing (lol @ "strange behavior.") though i did introduce myself to my boyfriend by randomly rollerskating up his driveway and handing him a silly greeting card, so...heh.

the reason i posted the wikisocion quote was because the infantile role was being equated with feminine behavior and "being fought for and pursued" was being equated with feminine behavior and i was getting sort of confused and thinking clarification might be needed.

as far as the erotic roles..i think there have been a lot of threads on this with all kinds of different opinions. my take is that they refer to general behavior trends of the types which could include, but aren't specific to, romantic behavior.

[Beautiful sky]

Well, I relate to the OP's post. The more someone wants me, the less hard it is to get them to want me more, and therefore the more I'm interested in them.

On the flip side, the more they want me, the harder it is for me to leave them. That was what happened in my last relationship. At first, she wanted me, and I wanted her, and I pursued her because she pursued me. But after a while I didn't want her at all, but she still really wanted me. I tried to deny my disinterest to please her. It was ugly.

Her?...you are male or female...sorry, but confused.

So to Maritsa and Random Ness (or anyone who'd care to comment), what do you think would constitute a better description of the "romance attitudes"? And, backing up a step, do you think that the constructs identify something valid?

A better description is the one you write yourself and not let someone pattern you (especially an Ne ego block type), because they pattern to the point where they don't see the individual possibilities or variations. Sexual/romance attitudes are too varied to establish consistency. The only consistency that I have been able to establish thus far is that Beta SLE/IEI prefer aggressive sex and LSE/EII prefer a gentler less aggressive, but still varied, because of the Ne in the ego block of EII.

[Suz]

me either.

i've historically preferred situations where i knew the guy was interested but i was the more influential one in moving things forward. i don't want to feel like i'm being swept along and am not an active agent in it. it's like if i'm being pursued i have to question whether its something i want or not. but if i am the one moving things forward then there is no question.

i'm a female introvert... but out of all the responses here, i relate to galen and ssmall the most. hmm.

i do also relate to anon about developing feelings faster for someone if there are signs that they might be attracted to me. but that's not really the same as them "pursuing" me. eh.

Are you sure you're not IEE laghlagh?? I'm serious...

[ashlesha]

Are you sure you're not IEE laghlagh?? I'm serious...

responded here, hope you don't mind.

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...tml#post698651

[Suz]

responded here, hope you don't mind.

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...tml#post698651

I'm just saying, one of the key differences about IEE vs EII the way I see it, is taking initiative. You expressed taking a certain amount of initiative in establishing non-platonic relationships that I dont think an EII would do: "I was the more influential one in moving things forward." Maybe i'm wrong about EIIs that way?

You approach such things in exactly the same way I do, actually.

[Park]

Just change the letters in your signature, laghlagh, and let's get this over with.

[Suz]

Just change the letters in your signature, laghlagh, and let's get this over with.

do u see it too??

[matilda]

Just because this might be relevant:

I do not want to be the leader. I refuse to be the leader. I want to live darkly and richly in my femaleness. I want a man lying over me, always over me. His will, his pleasure, his desire, his life, his work, his sexuality the touchstone, the command, my pivot. I don’t mind working, holding my ground intellectually, artistically; but as a woman, oh, God, as a woman I want to be dominated. I don’t mind being told to stand on my own feet, not to cling, be all that I am capable of doing, but I am going to be pursued, fucked, possessed by the will of a male at his time, his bidding.


Anais Nin

EIE imo

[matilda]

Just because this might be relevant:

I do not want to be the leader. I refuse to be the leader. I want to live darkly and richly in my femaleness. I want a man lying over me, always over me. His will, his pleasure, his desire, his life, his work, his sexuality the touchstone, the command, my pivot. I don’t mind working, holding my ground intellectually, artistically; but as a woman, oh, God, as a woman I want to be dominated. I don’t mind being told to stand on my own feet, not to cling, be all that I am capable of doing, but I am going to be pursued, fucked, possessed by the will of a male at his time, his bidding.

Anais Nin

EIE imo

[The Greeter]

I'm just saying, one of the key differences about IEE vs EII the way I see it, is taking initiative. You expressed taking a certain amount of initiative in establishing non-platonic relationships that I dont think an EII would do: "I was the more influential one in moving things forward." Maybe i'm wrong about EIIs that way?

You approach such things in exactly the same way I do, actually.

Eh. I would not take that as a general rule. Although EIIs are less likely to take the first initiative, I do not think it is necessarily an extraordinary occurance for them to take it. I have done a fair share of initiating. Still, I am inclined to believe that the threshold to overcome any prior hesitation is higher in EIIs than in IEEs. Or maybe it is just that I can be overly shy; if not for my shyness, I would probably take the initiative more often.

Although, moving the relationship forward is a completely different story.

[blankblank]

So to Maritsa and Random Ness (or anyone who'd care to comment), what do you think would constitute a better description of the "romance attitudes"? And, backing up a step, do you think that the constructs identify something valid?

If it's true for most people, then I don't have a problem with the theory itself, I just have a problem with people assuming it's true for nearly everyone. And since it's not true for me, I don't really care about the descriptions. Of course, that goes beyond romance attitudes and relates to any parts of the socionics theory.

So I suppose the question is, is it true for most people? Or is it a badly thought-out guess?

[jewels]

I like the idea of being "fought for" in a Delta ST way, not a Beta ST way.

[UDP]

I like the idea of being "fought for" in a Delta ST way, not a Beta ST way.

Right.

I think a key difference is related to .

I do not want to be the leader. I refuse to be the leader. I want to live darkly and richly in my femaleness. I want a man lying over me, always over me. His will, his pleasure, his desire, his life, his work, his sexuality the touchstone, the command, my pivot. I don’t mind working, holding my ground intellectually, artistically; but as a woman, oh, God, as a woman I want to be dominated. I don’t mind being told to stand on my own feet, not to cling, be all that I am capable of doing, but I am going to be pursued, fucked, possessed by the will of a male at his time, his bidding.

That's more like wanting someone with strong in their ego so that way, their will is imposed and thus recognized as some sort of affection or desire or attachment. That is ultimately not very delta - although I know several NFs who have responded very well to the initial attraction or forwardnesss illustrated there.

The problem is that delta NFs, deep down, don't want someone to run roughshod over them (as a sign of romantic interest or illustration). Yes, I believe they enjoy being pursued and desire and wanted to be with, but,


because the world so much tries to run them over and put them into doormat or oppressed situations, they don't see that as indicating love. I've known delta NFs who have been in long term relationships with very willful people, people who want to assert their own wills in and above others, and it very frequently builds resentment, and a distancing. NFs especially do that in a passive way, over time, because they have such strong coping skills, and even perhaps think that they can or should be able to handle such.

And yes, if you're thinking to yourself - well some of that is not even related to socionics, and is more about a person's maturity; their capacity to love and to be in a relationship is outside of socionics -- you're absolutely right. But I do feel as if I see enough of a trend her to comment on it, for this to be significant.



To me (and I'm finding out just what this means the more I go through relationships with delta NFs), what "being pursued by a delta ST" means is this very subtle (or sometimes more overt) supporting of the delta NF's own desires, own will, own interests. So not domineering over those interests and neglecting them or asserting other interests (to exaggerate), but an actual "caring" about the other person's interests and well being.


This is really a curious thing to me because, (AS DEMONSTRATED HERE ON THE FORUM BY SOME PEOPLE ), there is at times extremely heavy resistance to anything related to caring or even catering to some delta NFs. There are some people, like Minde and some aspects of Maritsa, who are more open about how they'd like to be cared for or protected. There are others like Ritella and Lobo and Galen who seem revolted at such things, such 'signs of weakness'. There are other people who, as an EII, simply develop this mechanism that they don't need or deserve any help and sort of trudge along thinking 'it's just not for them'. And I've been in a relationship with someone who was, apparently, very strongly against any show of 'caring' for her, although it was a developed trait somewhat because she'd been run over so much in the past.


Like there are different manifestations of all the erotic roles, I think it comes out interestingly in what I'm getting at here. Delta NFs need to be 'cared for' in the right way, whichever way they've developed a reactionary pattern. But I think deep down that difference about their own self interests being supported, as opposed to bending to the will of someone else, is key. I don't know yet, as I'm sort of finding things out as I go, but, I wonder what people will say here.



And, if you haven't realized it by now, this is somewhat of a shift from what I originally wrote; I'm more in depth in this post. But I was curious about what delta NFs are attracted to and what they respond to, and how they interpret 'being loved' or 'being wanted' by someone else; what makes them feel a sense of really being in a relationship, being with someone.

[Suz]

Right.

I think a key difference is related to .



That's more like wanting someone with strong in their ego so that way, their will is imposed and thus recognized as some sort of affection or desire or attachment. That is ultimately not very delta - although I know several NFs who have responded very well to the initial attraction or forwardnesss illustrated there.

The problem is that delta NFs, deep down, don't want someone to run roughshod over them (as a sign of romantic interest or illustration). Yes, I believe they enjoy being pursued and desire and wanted to be with, but,


because the world so much tries to run them over and put them into doormat or oppressed situations, they don't see that as indicating love. I've known delta NFs who have been in long term relationships with very willful people, people who want to assert their own wills in and above others, and it very frequently builds resentment, and a distancing. NFs especially do that in a passive way, over time, because they have such strong coping skills, and even perhaps think that they can or should be able to handle such.

And yes, if you're thinking to yourself - well some of that is not even related to socionics, and is more about a person's maturity; their capacity to love and to be in a relationship is outside of socionics -- you're absolutely right. But I do feel as if I see enough of a trend her to comment on it, for this to be significant.



To me (and I'm finding out just what this means the more I go through relationships with delta NFs), what "being pursued by a delta ST" means is this very subtle (or sometimes more overt) supporting of the delta NF's own desires, own will, own interests. So not domineering over those interests and neglecting them or asserting other interests (to exaggerate), but an actual "caring" about the other person's interests and well being.


This is really a curious thing to me because, (AS DEMONSTRATED HERE ON THE FORUM BY SOME PEOPLE ), there is at times extremely heavy resistance to anything related to caring or even catering to some delta NFs. There are some people, like Minde and some aspects of Maritsa, who are more open about how they'd like to be cared for or protected. There are others like Ritella and Lobo and Galen who seem revolted at such things, such 'signs of weakness'. There are other people who, as an EII, simply develop this mechanism that they don't need or deserve any help and sort of trudge along thinking 'it's just not for them'. And I've been in a relationship with someone who was, apparently, very strongly against any show of 'caring' for her, although it was a developed trait somewhat because she'd been run over so much in the past.


Like there are different manifestations of all the erotic roles, I think it comes out interestingly in what I'm getting at here. Delta NFs need to be 'cared for' in the right way, whichever way they've developed a reactionary pattern. But I think deep down that difference about their own self interests being supported, as opposed to bending to the will of someone else, is key. I don't know yet, as I'm sort of finding things out as I go, but, I wonder what people will say here.



And, if you haven't realized it by now, this is somewhat of a shift from what I originally wrote; I'm more in depth in this post. But I was curious about what delta NFs are attracted to and what they respond to, and how they interpret 'being loved' or 'being wanted' by someone else; what makes them feel a sense of really being in a relationship, being with someone.

Wow, very insightful post Ryu. Thank you for caring enough to learn all of this about us. I think you've got it. Supporting our will, our interests--rings very true for me.

[Words]

I know a female IEE who never speaks about emotions and acts super independent. I actually had an argument with her about it because in my opinion it's just one big defense mechanism. Anyone any opinions on such an IEE or how to deal with her?

Even little things like instead of saying she can't afford beers she'll say fuck off and buy your own. I don't know what's wrong with saying I'm skint instead of being ballsy all the time.