Romance Styles Visual Identification

[Timeless]

So, I got this idea combined from the Temperament VI thread, and noticing how people's romance styles manifest visually:

Childlike: ILE, LII, EII, IEE

Socionics romancing style erotic childlike.png


Caring: ESE, SEI, LSE, SLI

Socionics romancing style erotic caring.png


Victim: EIE, IEI, LIE, ILI

Socionics romancing style erotic victim.png


Aggressor: SLE, LSI, SEE, ESI

Socionics romancing style erotic aggressor.png


I wanted to put more photos but I was limited to 40, anyway what do you think?

[eunice]

Your list looks great in general, even though I do not agree with some of the typings. Nevertheless, it has roughly captured the essence of each romance styles.

[EyeSeeCold]

Jon Stewart reminds me of my ESE friend. What type do you consider him?

Oh yea, nice job.

BTW: Who is the caregiver, bottom-left?

[CILi]

Romance...

VI...

I was expecting somethin' different from you, Timeless.

Biggest trend I see is some sorta "eye-and-mouth thing" with a signature tension/focus/direction for each Rom-Style. Though adding vids might muddle your OP's intent, I wonder what else would "pop out" with that extra dimension.

[eunice]

BTW: Who is the caregiver, bottom-left?

Anne Hathaway.

[EyeSeeCold]

Oh yea from the Princess Diaries.
(Don't ask me how I know that.)

[Sir Knight]

Oh yea from the Princess Diaries.
(Don't ask me how I know that.)

*er-hem*

So. How do you know that?

[EyeSeeCold]

Hey man, it's not my fault. It was the only thing on in the hospital lobby.
(Don't ask me how I ended up in the hospital.)

[Sir Knight]

Hey man, it's not my fault. It was the only thing on in the hospital lobby.
(Don't ask me how I ended up in the hospital.)

...so how did you end up in the hospitol?

[Timeless]

Your list looks great in general, even though I do not agree with some of the typings. Nevertheless, it has roughly captured the essence of each romance styles.

That's the whole idea.

Jon Stewart reminds me of my ESE friend. What type do you consider him?

An ILE/ENTp who plays with his -HA a whole lot.

Romance...

VI...

I was expecting somethin' different from you, Timeless.

Biggest trend I see is some sorta "eye-and-mouth thing" with a signature tension/focus/direction for each Rom-Style. Though adding vids might muddle your OP's intent, I wonder what else would "pop out" with that extra dimension.

Unlike the other thread where the focus was on their body and posture. I wanted to focus on the facial expressions (especially the eyes) and features. In my opinion, it is much more noticeable, enough to make distinctions.

This is sort of the physical vibes I notice:

Infantiles: Indirect, gentle.
Victims: Indirect, intense.
Agressors: Direct, intense.
Caregivers: Direct, gentle.

As for videos, I do have that idea somewhere, but I haven't collaborated it yet.

On another note, I had an idea to make a little page to actually fit all the pictures I had in mind.

(Don't ask me how I know that.)

Freakin' -DS.

[d1ffe7]

This is really great!

On another note, I had an idea to make a little page to actually fit all the pictures I had in mind.

I think you should. (:

[Timeless]

Now for a little experiment:

Taking the Temperament VI thread and this thread into account, can you take a wild guess what types my friends are?

[CILi]

Am I do it right, Professa Timeless?

 

Infantile () + EP Temp = ILE > IEE

 

Caregiver () + IP Temp = SEI > SLI

 

Victim () + IP Temp = ILI > IEI

 

Aggressor () + EP Temp = SEE > SLE

(The potential of combining the two (your Temp and Rom threads) and streamlining the VI process from it is, well, pretty exciting.)

[ozone]

Some of the Infantiles look like a lot of fun.

[eunice]

Now for a little experiment:

Taking the Temperament VI thread and this thread into account, can you take a wild guess what types my friends are?

Starting from the photo on the extreme left,

1) Ne-ENFp?
2) Ne-INFj?
3) Si-ISTp?
4) Fe-ESFj?

[The Ineffable]

The only Infantile I agree with are 1, 3, 9 and *maybe* 5.

O'Reilly, as a stereotypical LSE, I don't know how could he depict a Victim attitude. What in his appearance or behavior made you think of Victim attitude?

Aggressor pic 3 and Steven Seagal look like Victim rather.

[Exodus]

An ILE/ENTp who plays with his -HA a whole lot.

Jon Stewart is ILI IMO. His humor is very much > . Basically it consists of presenting ridiculous quotes or facts and allowing people to draw their own conclusions.

[EyeSeeCold]

Jon Stewart is ILI IMO. His humor is very much > . Basically it consists of presenting ridiculous quotes or facts and allowing people to draw their own conclusions.

Assuming he writes his own jokes.

He's too engaged to be ILI.

[Timeless]

Guy A: Caregiver + (EJ) = ESE/ESFj
Guy B: Victim + (IP) = ILI/INTp
Guy C: Infantile + (EP) = IEE/ENFp
Girl A: Aggressor + (EP) = SLE/ESTp


CILi, I think you're onto this. I might have more 'splanin' to do, but personally I think it all falls under the eyes and whole demeanor.

The only Infantile I agree with are 1, 3, 9 and *maybe* 5.

O'Reilly, as a stereotypical LSE, I don't know how could he depict a Victim attitude. What in his appearance or behavior made you think of Victim attitude?

As hardcore as he can look, I think his eyes give it away. It's kinda like the victims have the eyes of a lost puppy: usually wide eyed, unfocused, lazy eyelids, a look of "distance."

Personally, I think he is -LIE/ENTj.

-PoLR needs -DS here:

Aggressor pic 3 and Steven Seagal look like Victim rather.

I think I know what you mean: he can look like a victim, most of the time he comes across as an aggressor. This goes for all styles actually; I think an infantile can momentarily present themselves in an aggressor way, or a victim as a caregiver etc. but what is most natural for the person? For instance, to take one example, I can't imagine Michael Ironside making silly faces or childish behavior for the fun of it, even if he tried, do you think he would come across as natural as George Carlin?

[The Ineffable]

Personally, I think he is -LIE/ENTj.

Oh, OK. Let me tell you some things that may make you rethink: O'Reilly is a simple, traditional, explicit man. LIEs tent to be much more open, elegant and flexible - and think about the fact that they're romantic and visionaries, often explorers and pioneers in different fields. LIEs rarely if even get angry, especially in public, while in a lot of descriptions (and my observations as well) it is stated that LSEs are often quick to anger.
That incident is not the only time O'Reilly reacted angrily, he gets angry when they promote homosexuality, drugs, atheism, and so on - the things that pervert society, the way he understands it.

I think I know what you mean: he can look like a victim, most of the time he comes across as an aggressor. This goes for all styles actually; I think an infantile can momentarily present themselves in an aggressor way, or a victim as a caregiver etc. but what is most natural for the person? For instance, to take one example, I can't imagine Michael Ironside making silly faces or childish behavior for the fun of it, even if he tried, do you think he would come across as natural as George Carlin?

But Seagal is always like that. He's more or less introspective, mysterious, philosophical, metaphorical, mystic - kind of shy even. Maybe a great representative of the Victim attitude. Try to think about the real Seagal and how his look fits with his personality, not a certain film role.

[Aleksei]

I disagree with a fair few of those typings, so overall I'm not sure how informative the gallery actually is.

[ozone]

I disagree with a fair few of those typings, so overall I'm not sure how informative the gallery actually is.

Which ones?

[Timeless]

Oh, OK. Let me tell you some things that may make you rethink: O'Reilly is a simple, traditional, explicit man. LIEs tent to be much more open, elegant and flexible - and think about the fact that they're romantic and visionaries, often explorers and pioneers in different fields. LIEs rarely if even get angry, especially in public, while in a lot of descriptions (and my observations as well) it is stated that LSEs are often quick to anger.
That incident is not the only time O'Reilly reacted angrily, he gets angry when they promote homosexuality, drugs, atheism, and so on - the things that pervert society, the way he understands it.

But Seagal is always like that. He's more or less introspective, mysterious, philosophical, metaphorical, mystic - kind of shy even. Maybe a great representative of the Victim attitude. Try to think about the real Seagal and how his look fits with his personality, not a certain film role.
YouTube - Steven Seagal on Jimmy Kimmel Live PART 1

I don't want to go off-topic from the main idea of this thread, but we can take it over here:

Bill O'Reilly & Steven Seagal

Where everyone else can pitch in their input also.

I disagree with a fair few of those typings, so overall I'm not sure how informative the gallery actually is.

FYI: I didn't pull these out of my ass. I made sure a majority of people came to agreement for a typing instead of going by one or my own, and like ozone said, which ones?

[The Ineffable]

I don't want to go off-topic from the main idea of this thread, but we can take it over here:

I get the idea. My opinion: your typings and observations for the OP are inaccurate (not totally, though).

[Beautiful sky]

Segal is SLE

[1981slater]

Prince Felipe (Te-ENTj) and Princess Letizia (Fi-ISFj)



Prince William (Ni-ENTj) and Kate Middleton (Se-ISFj)



King Juan Carlos (Si-ESFj) and Queen Sofía (Ne-INTj)



Prince Charles (Ni-INTj) and Camilla Parker Bowles (Se-ESFj)

[Aleksei]

Which ones?

Off the top of my head: Carlin (EIE, Victim), Stewart (Same), O'Reilly (SEE, Aggressor), Hopkins (IEI, Victim), The Governator (SEE, Aggressor).

[squark]

All the male "Victims" look like fucking dorks.

Yeah they do.

[Pa3s]

When I tried to assign people I got to know lately to romance styles I had the impression that it was very easy. The first thing I usually do is to see if I can find the right quadra for them, but figuring out their romance style is often much more intuitive for me, assumed that my guesses are correct.

I think this small group say a lot about the basic impression you get from people, not just their behaviour if they have a relationship with someone.

[Ver]

I'd also say I intuitively asses what people's romance styles are. The rest varies form type to type, some people are so easy to type whereas with others I could go on for a few months. Of course not by interviewing them and asking about details in order to find out.

[Codie]

theres a theme, I see. a few possible mistypings though. For one, I doubt Steve Jobs is a Ni ego and Scarlett Johansson seems more like ego > ego..so victim or caregiver (but I could definitely be wrong about her).

[DirectorAbbie]

As far as Timeless's pictures go, in general, the infantiles look nice, the victims look strange, the aggressors look annoying, and the caregivers look uninteresting.

[Creepy-pokeball]

I'm not quite sure the groups are even slightly accurate.