Delta Dating and Relationships

[Suz]

If infantiles initiate like aggressors...

I wanted to clarify this before, but forgot...When I used 'like' (like aggressors) above i meant "the same way as"...Clarifying this just to avoid misunderstandings...

@WA: They sounded more gamma-like kind of descriptions to me, but I guess everyone uses w/e analogies/explanations make sense to them....so anyone can use them i guess.

PS: I'm sure y'all are already 'good at', as it were, dating; don't over-analyze it and just be yourselves

wait, what sounded like gamma-like descriptions? what are you referring to?

[Absurd]

Haha. There's many aggressors in delta quadra lately.

[Beautiful sky]

...
April, I'm pretty sure that what you say about yourself is a reference to Extraversion:

....

Yeah, i can always tell people are Extratim when they do the sizzle-hot thing , lol

And yes, Se (as impact) can very much be physical aggression/force too (amidst many other things)

I have created a thread to extend this conversation.

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...490#post800490

[Crispy]

Gulenko's Male/Female Romance Styles/Types

1. Female types

1.1. "Caring" woman, or a "woman-mother"
Inclined to take care of their male partner. Are attracted to the weak, but intelligent men, who are subject to it in everyday affairs. She was pleased to protect, support, cheer up. Such qualities of character that in the mass consciousness does not cause people to respect the male, the woman forgives or finds it perfectly acceptable.

1.2. Woman "Aggressor"
All the while trying to compete with men, including in erotic relationships. Inclined to irony, ridicule over the opposite sex. Likes to feel more competent than men in any business. During lovemaking expects men fawning, flashy weakness, emotional instability.

1.3. "Victimization" woman
The ideal of a woman is physically strong man, reminiscent of the super-American militants. She wants to endure his power to resist its onslaught, to feel like a victim. In the love games prefer different forms of warfare, inflames passions partner. Women of this type often are inherent masochistic traits. True, not all of them are aware of this report.

1.4. "Infantile" woman, or a "woman-daughter"
The ideal of the woman is a good and experienced, well-adapted to life the man is usually older than her age. In the presence of such men, it feels a little girl, almost all dependent on it. In the game of love he prefers psychological factor of spiritual conversation, disposing the music, to create conditions for relaxation. Above all, appreciate the indulgence and attention.

2. Men types

2.1. "Careful," man or "man-father"
Experienced and attentive to the spiritual world woman partner who knows how to position it to yourself patronizing courtship. In the game of love very much appreciates feminine tenderness and vulnerability, waiting for his admiration of life experience and skill.

2.2. Man "Aggressor"
This sociotype has a tendency to violent mastery of a woman. In the game of love loves to show fight. Can afford to rudeness, and sometimes causes women to pain, both physical and moral. Expects women subordinate force.

2.3. "Victimization" man
Idealizes the imperious woman. Adapts to its tastes, it respects the endurance and stamina. The behavior that emphasizes its dependence and obedience, then bursts out of control. In a relationship with a woman subconsciously waiting for instructions, tricks, reproaches. Do not give similar reactions, unwittingly provoking their manifestation.

2.4. "Infantile" man or "man-child"
Dependent, naive in worldly affairs, expects the business women and emotional support. Unwittingly underlines its little noticed, killings ability, failure to adapt to life's struggle. Respect to women experience and responsiveness to their concerns.

Source

[Beautiful sky]

Crispy, I guess this is what would explain my "concern" in the numerality of my posts in this thread...

" Dependent, naive in worldly affairs, expects the business women and emotional support. Unwittingly underlines its little noticed, killings ability, failure to adapt to life's struggle. Respect to women experience and responsiveness to their concerns."

Makes sense.

[Lobo]

Gulenko's Male/Female Romance Styles/Types

1. Female types

1.1. "Caring" woman, or a "woman-mother"
Inclined to take care of their male partner. Are attracted to the weak, but intelligent men, who are subject to it in everyday affairs. She was pleased to protect, support, cheer up. Such qualities of character that in the mass consciousness does not cause people to respect the male, the woman forgives or finds it perfectly acceptable.

1.2. Woman "Aggressor"
All the while trying to compete with men, including in erotic relationships. Inclined to irony, ridicule over the opposite sex. Likes to feel more competent than men in any business. During lovemaking expects men fawning, flashy weakness, emotional instability.

1.3. "Victimization" woman
The ideal of a woman is physically strong man, reminiscent of the super-American militants. She wants to endure his power to resist its onslaught, to feel like a victim. In the love games prefer different forms of warfare, inflames passions partner. Women of this type often are inherent masochistic traits. True, not all of them are aware of this report.

1.4. "Infantile" woman, or a "woman-daughter"
The ideal of the woman is a good and experienced, well-adapted to life the man is usually older than her age. In the presence of such men, it feels a little girl, almost all dependent on it. In the game of love he prefers psychological factor of spiritual conversation, disposing the music, to create conditions for relaxation. Above all, appreciate the indulgence and attention.

2. Men types

2.1. "Careful," man or "man-father"
Experienced and attentive to the spiritual world woman partner who knows how to position it to yourself patronizing courtship. In the game of love very much appreciates feminine tenderness and vulnerability, waiting for his admiration of life experience and skill.

2.2. Man "Aggressor"
This sociotype has a tendency to violent mastery of a woman. In the game of love loves to show fight. Can afford to rudeness, and sometimes causes women to pain, both physical and moral. Expects women subordinate force.

2.3. "Victimization" man
Idealizes the imperious woman. Adapts to its tastes, it respects the endurance and stamina. The behavior that emphasizes its dependence and obedience, then bursts out of control. In a relationship with a woman subconsciously waiting for instructions, tricks, reproaches. Do not give similar reactions, unwittingly provoking their manifestation.

2.4. "Infantile" man or "man-child"
Dependent, naive in worldly affairs, expects the business women and emotional support. Unwittingly underlines its little noticed, killings ability, failure to adapt to life's struggle. Respect to women experience and responsiveness to their concerns.

Source

Awful...

[Crispy]

Not really, I think this piece of canon socionics fits splendidly. At least the parts that are readable

[jessica129]

Why is it awful? I thought it was good.

[Suz]

felafel, yeah i remember, wasn't it 1981slater or another ILE (I sometimes get him mixed up with one other guy) who came up with that list?

I mean, i see what you're saying, and I agree with you. I guess it was just an attempt at defining the functions in a different way, like you'd alluded to previously.

[Suz]

I also agree that ESFp-Fi, for example, have got to be just the most caring people out of the whole socion. Ime, if they 'know', if they have decided i mean, they can just hand you their destiny in the most completely selfless way possible.

I remember feeling kinda down for reasons some years ago, and ESFp-Fi tried to do everything that is humanly possible to help cheer me up. There was nothing 'forceful' about it, just this energy oozing out his every pore. So we went on the most amazing bicycle ride ever. I thought, well, it's possible we'll lose a limb (or more!), but hey, dude is dripping life right here. I almost wanted to say: hey man, don't sweat so much, try to save some for later, you know, this 'thing' is precious and kinda limited. But it was just awesome, honestly, what he did, and almost even painful coz I knew he didn't even care about what he (well, me too, lol) stood to loose. Also, best coastal road on the planet - if you're unlucky you end up straight in the sea after bumping into some really sharp edges, lol.

Anyway, so yeah, Se people have this energy that is intoxicating, esp. when they 'know.

Well, this was quite a blanket of a post, haha; well, if you peeps don't find any use in it just wrap yourselves up in it or sth ()

Actually I have an SEE friend who is like that as well. When I was upset over that dual guy, she reached out and was just so warm and cared so much to lend an ear. She cooked for me, took me shopping, and never hesitated to give me honest advice. She also drove to my new city a few times and would surprise me with her visits (and it was a welcome surprise since at first i was pretty lonely not knowing too many people at the time). At first I thought maybe she's ESE, but SEE seems pretty clear at this point. Totally focused on Fi. Not as Si-valuing as I'd thought based on her "caregiving" behaviors (e.g. she was trying to get me to wear high heeled pumps to look sexy, which she does as well, without complaint; me, no can do ). She is one of my most bosom friends though. I can't imagine a more gentle, caring, sweet person.

[dattebayo]

somehow I get the feeling that female SLIs and male IEEs have it easy when it comes to this. I have seen it plenty of times

the male SLI female IEE relationship is a different story all together though. I always thought I didn't go too much by norms and rules but, but I can't see what else it could be

That's odd. I assumed gender roles would make it difficult for female SLIs and male IEEs or something.

I think female SLIs and male IEEs on their own are against the female male stereotypes.

but my point is that both seem to be pretty good at hooking up with others (not always duals). Female SLI just sits around (seriously) or walks around all cooly and guys will hit on them. IEE guys (and ime also EII guys) will know what they want and make a move.

[dattebayo]

To those that are in relationships with SLIs, how long did it typically take to get to know them and for them to open up? What did u consider "opening up"? I ask because it takes me really long and wonder if that's something IEEs/ other deltas find appealing because I don't find it at all appealing in the opposite sex.

with the SLIs I have gotten to know, I had this odd thing, where I felt I already knew them somehow. I know it doesn't make sense, but it was like I knew all that mattered and the rest (facts) was just extra details

the opening up stuff happened pretty early on I guess. But it is more of a gradual thing and new stuff will always be added. I'm always told I am like an open book. Myself I like to think I keep things to myself, but it is prolly true what they say. I tell everything when I'm in a good mood. Anyways, my point is that when I do this with the SLIs I think it makes it easier for them to tell me stuff. The stuff they tell me they just tell me when they want too. I rarely ask (I think )

it is funny, cuz sometimes I can tell that they just told me something MASSIVE. But massive in their standards and I know it took a lot of courage for them, but in reality it is just something totally normal and here they were worrying all by themselves this always make me smile. Sorry SLIs but sometimes you can be really huggable like that

but at the same time it bugs me a little, because I see that the SLI considered it a major problem for so long and suffered(somewhat anyways) alone by keeping it to themselves. So when I see them worry about something needlessly (yeah I know, needlessly in my eyes) I can't help but butt in and call them on this. I know it's a bit intrusive, but I do it without thinking. But it's like having a friend who is gay, everyone knows he's gay, but he is still afraid to say it. Stuff like that bugs me MASSIVELY, cuz he is worried that his friends will look at him differently if they knew. THEY WONT. Even if he doesn't want to I think it is better to let him know that I know, but in a way so he understands that all that we had together is not altered at all, and that I look at him exactly as I always did. Sorry to go rambling in your answer, but this just happened to me and a friend. And sorry for not caring to go edit

as to finding it appealing I guess yes and no. I don't like it when it causes the SLIs to suffer needlessly. I'm not a fan of that at all.
but sometimes it can be funny and a bit sweet ha ha. When it's something stupid I guess

as they trust me more, I think it is easier for them to open up. The SLIs I know tell me stuff all the time, and I think that this is a good thing. Stupid stuff or not. Cause then I can give them my perspective on things, and sometimes something as simple as that makes it much easier for them.
I feel my job is to glide over the stupid stuff as banter and then offer my view on heavier stuff

oh another appealing trait about this is that there is a bigger notion of trust when a SLI opens up as opposed to a blabberhead like me for instance.
That said I do think it is a good thing for all SLIs to learn to open up more. Just to a trustworthy person though and not some a hole

[Creepy-Snaps]

Just posting really quick to mention this thread helped me realize I prefer taking things slowly... and that there are others out there like me who prefer that as well. So I took the initiative in talking to a girl I think might be an INFj. Thanks moredhel!

[jewels]

while I do agree with this chart, I don't personally feel that Delta is slow.

In comparison with Beta, it is. But I don't like long drawn out affairs, and prefer things to be progressing and moving forward, otherwise I get bored and lose interest.

I've seen Betas walk up to each other in a bar and essentially be like "I'm in love with you. Let's hang out." and "Okay, fabulous, here's my number." That'd make me uncomfortable.

But an ISTp might walk up to me, chat for 30 minutes until we both know we're interested, and then get my email, and later ask me out to dinner. I guess that's slow in comparison to beta. But not that slow.

My ISTP and I were exclusive after about a month, and I think we both felt "couple-ish" after only about 2 weeks. I didn't feel rushed at all though, and I know he didn't either (he was actually waiting for me to push things forward in fact). So I do like how the Delta thing pans out.

[moredhel]

My sister and I are only just now starting to think about dating. But even then, (and this could be a cultural thing or the way we were raised too, maybe not totally type-related) we date with the prospect of finding a soul mate to possibly get married to, not just for fun and giggles nor just to be in a relationship. We're too independent for that.

Makes sense, dating for the sake of dating has never appealed to me, nor have casual flings etc. Every relationship I've been in or attempted to start has had some view of being final. Although being Fi DS sometimes that need for a deep connection with someone can impair my better judgement.

lol, this is sort of a difficult question for me to answer in that i'm not totally sure. It's all taken on a case-by-case basis. I think basically along the lines of what we've mentioned so far in this thread, the best approach would just be in a friendly way, as someone looking for friendship. Though, in the back of my mind, a random guy striking up convo with me would make me consider a possibility that he might be interested in more (though what "more" is i wouldn't know), but I would also just see it (trying to be realistic) as someone just wanting to be friends with me. I would say, make conversation every opportunity you get, like small convo or comment every time you see her. Say a joke or two, something indirect, something witty (which if you're LSE and she's delta NF, I'm pretty sure she'll like it--I really love Te-humor ), like as you're standing around waiting for class. Oh also, you could try and be next to her in class as often as you can--I would certainly take notice of that over time, especially if someone is making it a point of being there (I can usually tell). Eventually if she seems interested in talking to you, see if she'd like to grab dinner after class, but just phrase it casually like that, e.g. " hey I (or a friend and I) are going to grab dinner at "x", are you hungry? you're welcome to join us..." If she doesn't accept, dont get discouraged, try it again at some point.

Oh also eye contact is HUGE for me. In fact, this is how i can initially tell an SLI might be interested--they give me what i like to call "the stare of passion". They just walk by where i am, and out of nowhere just look me straight in the eyes for a lot longer than a normal glance (like maybe 5-6 seconds) with a lot more intensity than their usual gaze, and then walk away. It's HOT!!!! I usually get very flustered when this happens, but it delivers the message, loud and clear. Still though, since the SLIs i've known so far don't follow up on that too well, I end up wondering afterwards whether they really meant it or not, or what that stare really meant in the first place.

What I'm trying to say is, delta NFs pick up on these subtleties, so the key is you only need to be subtle. Maybe not so subtle to an SLI-degree --a little stronger wouldn't hurt--but coming on TOO strong can be problematic. Be subtle but constant. And patient. So it's actually a great thing that you see her regularly in gym class. That will help a lot!

Lol thanks for all that, very valuable information, unfortunately my interest has bf but oh well. I have however been reminded that i'm terrible at that first initiation step, basically approaching someone I don't really know and starting a conversation or the equivalent unless I can somehow work in my Te (helping, instructing etc.). I only tend to initiate after this point and in reality it's mostly in response to signals and has only occasionally happened purely on my own steam.

My first meeting ideal scenario goes (at some sort of closed function not a pub/club),

• Delta NF initiates first contact or make herself extremely approachable

• Conversation reveals some compatibilities flows naturally.

• If some signals are present I will ask for contact detail or somehow slip it in.

• I will happily make the next contact and help things to develop over several weeks.

• If I pick up on strong mutual interest I will initiate a relationship, most likely by asking them out on a proper date.

This plays into my point about mutual interest, for a delta to be comfortable initiating I think they need to establish it. I think both Delta NF's would be better at making first contact than the Delta ST's, but it's all a bit situational particularly with EII and LSE, where as it seems like IEE will take the lead for the most part in that pair.

That was my initial approach actually, but turned out to be very disappointing when i finally met them and knew right off the bat they weren't what I was looking for. So after that, I would just email anyone that seemed interesting in the least, to start out by meeting up. Very few guys responded to that, and I find it really hard to generate feelings of attraction/attachment either way. It all feels very contrived and forced, like we're there to see if we want to date each other.

I've thought this too, I've always been very wary not to announce any feelings I have too early. When communications become about trying to generate a relationship it never seems to work, kinda needs to hide under the guise of friendship until the feelings exist for both parties (haha delta dating is complicated ).

I think it really all depends. Theoretically, as far as I remember, the extravert in the dual pair is the one who is best equipped to initiate, but again, even though in my case with the SLI I'm making a lot of the big obvious moves in establishing communication, it still has to be reiterated that the SLI actually made THE first move with the stare. The unique thing (possibly in part due to extraversion) was that I was able to pick up on that and follow suit. An introvert would be too inside themselves to notice something like that, I think.

If it's an IEE-LSE interaction, i'm not too sure how that would go, i guess either one might initiate in their own special way I can't really say that my way of initiating is all that smooth, tbh. My moves have been pretttty awkward I have to say. I guess the initial stages of love can be awkward in general.

Lol unfortunately Te isn't the best extroverted function for new social interaction , I'm guessing IEE would get things rolling in a IEE-LSE pair. Haha yeah my moves are on the awkward side as well, I'm so much smoother when I haven't actually decided that i'm interested in a person . But it can be a very adorable quality if the interest is there , I would imagine myself responding well to awkward moves .

Just posting really quick to mention this thread helped me realize I prefer taking things slowly... and that there are others out there like me who prefer that as well. So I took the initiative in talking to a girl I think might be an INFj. Thanks moredhel!

No worries.

while I do agree with this chart, I don't personally feel that Delta is slow.

In comparison with Beta, it is. But I don't like long drawn out affairs, and prefer things to be progressing and moving forward, otherwise I get bored and lose interest.

I've seen Betas walk up to each other in a bar and essentially be like "I'm in love with you. Let's hang out." and "Okay, fabulous, here's my number." That'd make me uncomfortable.

But an ISTp might walk up to me, chat for 30 minutes until we both know we're interested, and then get my email, and later ask me out to dinner. I guess that's slow in comparison to beta. But not that slow.

My ISTP and I were exclusive after about a month, and I think we both felt "couple-ish" after only about 2 weeks. I didn't feel rushed at all though, and I know he didn't either (he was actually waiting for me to push things forward in fact). So I do like how the Delta thing pans out.

Yeah I don't think initiation has to be slow, just indirect, it can be slow too though I find it depends on the level of interaction. If i'm at a social event and I spend the night talking to someone i'm compatible with then the interest will be there and we would probably exchange numbers, however if I'm seeing someone once a week at a class and only really talking very briefly then it takes a lot longer.

The part between getting the number and going exclusive would be the slow part in your example . I wouldn't trade it though that time is invaluable.

[Minde]

So many thoughts, so little time.

I would say that extroversion does play a relatively significant part in determining who does the majority of the initiating. But there are different kinds of initiating and they happen at different times, and I think it's more often than not an exchange of initiating than purely one-sided.

My sister (ENFp) decided that her now husband was very cute when she first saw him. She came up with all sorts of ways to come into contact with him, from bringing cookies over to his family to finding a broken cell phone on the street and making a special trip to ask if it was his or his friends. So she made herself very available, which I consider a form of initiation. But they didn't start going out until he asked her.

I don't think I could do things the way she did.


For myself... I basically need a direct expression of interest for it to resonate with me. Otherwise I might think he's nice, friendly, good-looking, etc., but not consider it a romantic relationship. To further complicate things, if I know a relationship won't work out I'll shut it down before it can even get started.

Also, I'm terribly monogamous and I tend to unconsciously expect others to be like that, too (even though it's not especially realistic) so it shocks me and puts me off whenever someone expresses interest in me and then in someone else.

All of this put together, it's probably no wonder I have found it very hard to get into a good romantic relationship.

[moredhel]

So many thoughts, so little time.

I would say that extroversion does play a relatively significant part in determining who does the majority of the initiating. But there are different kinds of initiating and they happen at different times, and I think it's more often than not an exchange of initiating than purely one-sided.

My sister (ENFp) decided that her now husband was very cute when she first saw him. She came up with all sorts of ways to come into contact with him, from bringing cookies over to his family to finding a broken cell phone on the street and making a special trip to ask if it was his or his friends. So she made herself very available, which I consider a form of initiation. But they didn't start going out until he asked her.

Lol I think the cookies thing would work on me , that all sounds really cute.

I don't think I could do things the way she did.

When I first met my EII friend she was the one who first started talking to me and was very friendly and easy to open up to, but purely from a friendship pov as she had a boyfriend at the time. I couldn't imagine her going to the same lengths as your sister though.

I would be very curious to know more about how EII's develop interests in people, is it something that generally develops on it's own (non reciprocated interest) or is it in response to positive interaction with someone (potentially mutual interest)? Feel free to elaborate beyond my somewhat ambiguous question .

For myself... I basically need a direct expression of interest for it to resonate with me. Otherwise I might think he's nice, friendly, good-looking, etc., but not consider it a romantic relationship. To further complicate things, if I know a relationship won't work out I'll shut it down before it can even get started.

Also, I'm terribly monogamous and I tend to unconsciously expect others to be like that, too (even though it's not especially realistic) so it shocks me and puts me off whenever someone expresses interest in me and then in someone else.

All of this put together, it's probably no wonder I have found it very hard to get into a good romantic relationship.

If it reassures you somewhat I am also sucker for monogamy, I don't go around expressing my interests very often so when I do it's essentially a pledge to see it out to a conclusion before moving on. I also expect the same from others in regards to me but I haven't been let down as of yet.
Needing a direct expression of interest is interesting, could you give it an example context?

Yeah in general I've also found good relationships very difficult to find because of all the that's involved to get in a position where I'm comfortable starting something. That and I'm exposed to so few other deltas IRL.

[UDP]

If it reassures you somewhat I am also sucker for trying to be an appealing caregiver figure

"from bringing cookies over"
Yes, your sister would have won my heart too, most likely.
As a matter of fact, that's basically what happened in my situation. Although, truth be told, I was actually given freshly baked brownies for my birthday. This is extremely ironic because at the time I wasn't interested in any serious way, in spite of my excessive remarks about delta NFs and baking brownies on this forum.

[Suz]

hmmm, maybe i should start baking more goodies...

Not a habit of mine at the moment as I am appalled by how unhealthy brownies and cookies are. (and I'm watching what i'm eating these days). I'd rather treat someone with fruit, tbh. But duly noted. Delta STs like brownies and cookies.

[UDP]

there are ways to make healthy goodies, WA.

Golly!

[UDP]

Also, I would typically prefer a fresh or organic fruit or vegetable to processed garbage.

No ~ BOLONEY *

[moredhel]

hmmm, maybe i should start baking more goodies...

Not a habit of mine at the moment as I am appalled by how unhealthy brownies and cookies are. (and I'm watching what i'm eating these days). I'd rather treat someone with fruit, tbh. But duly noted. Delta STs like brownies and cookies.

lol, cookies are a symbol of time and effort spend preforming a nice gesture in the form of a tasty treat, it could be anything really and achieve the same result.

[moredhel]

If it reassures you somewhat I am also sucker for trying to be an appealing caregiver figure

[Beautiful sky]

I would rather things be indirect, that way, it develops out of friendship; I don't want there to be affirmation of feelings/relationship interest right away. This gives me time and space to develop my feelings for the individual because I want to know that my feelings are real ones not just infatuation, short lived. I want there to be an easy and comfortable report much like a very close friendship; starting off anyway. When I establish a relations it is a long and deep one; my feelings for the person are real; I don't want to hurt someone if I don't intend upon reciprocating feelings that they have for me if I don't feel the same way for them.

My favorite scenario is a man who sits next to me on the metro and starts a small talk and then allows me time and space to say, "yes, I like you." Asks me out to coffee and gives me room to decide that I've typed them correctly and/or that he's not insane and about to murder me, or is abusive. Gives me a chance to take the easy step out without hurting his feelings or letting him ON.

Anyway, I don't know how people can write and say a few sentences on such a complex topic and expect it to be left at that. It's too big.

[Marie84]

I would be very curious to know more about how EII's develop interests in people, is it something that generally develops on it's own (non reciprocated interest) or is it in response to positive interaction with someone (potentially mutual interest)? Feel free to elaborate beyond my somewhat ambiguous question .

There's probably not a magic answer to this, unfortunately, but I think EII's are like everyone else being that they're going to have specific preferences that will differ from one another which will affect how they gauge potential relationships from duds

I can't speak for Minde, but in my case it has a lot to do with just focusing on observing the person I'm interacting with and asking myself if this is someone I can see being in my life.
I'm not overtly concerned about having mutual interests beyond a personality and ethical preference, in fact I'm often more intrigued by people who have interests that are outside my own, I think there's a sense of none-competitiveness in this.
That's not to say I want someone with an opposing lifestyle, being that I want to be with someone who has the same general goals and approaches to relationships as I do, like, I'm more interested in someone who wants a simple yet comfortable life without pretension compared to someone who wants to live the high-life, going to 5 star restaurants downtown and rubbing elbows with yuppies.

Anyways, outside of my yabbering, I think most, if not all, EII's will show interest by first confirming an interest in wanting to maintain contact and depending on how much they like and trust you, will open-up about personal sentiments in hopes of narrowing the gap, making that attempt at starting a relationship based on a rather deep interpersonal level and seeing how the other person deals with that.
In my case, people who show insensitivity or/and make attempts at contorting by feelings when I'm trying to be sincere are no longer regarded as relationship material

[somavision]

I first met my girlfriend 11 years before we started going out.

I think that there is kind of that open Ne/Si attitude where stuff happens if it's going to happen, nothing too forced, the Fi brings people just close enough so that the potential relationship can be evaluated informally and precisely, until it hits a kind of critical mass and everthing is known to be good.... or not.

[UDP]

I first met my girlfriend 11 years before we started going out.

I think that there is kind of that open Ne/Si attitude where stuff happens if it's going to happen, nothing too forced, the Fi brings people just close enough so that the potential relationship can be evaluated informally and precisely, until it hits a kind of critical mass and everthing is known to be good.... or not.

the aristocracy comes in at some point. Fi types seem to do it about certain "perceived static qualities", as in, the things that don't change about someone, and making an evaluation off of what they see as "who someone really is", with some sort of emotional calculus about their perceived ability to grow or change and how that fits in with their own "direction" or code of ethics.

For delta STs, the same things happens, it's just more.......... is this 'working' or not. Does this seem profitable? More a matter of increase vs loss, actual dynamic statistics that are more cumulative in a micro sense, compared to the NF's macro highlighting of imporant traits or trait development patterns or predictions.


It's the same thing, just different preferences for which data to interpret or see as "meaningful". The same decision.

[Absurd]

[moredhel]

I can't speak for Minde, but in my case it has a lot to do with just focusing on observing the person I'm interacting with and asking myself if this is someone I can see being in my life.
I'm not overtly concerned about having mutual interests beyond a personality and ethical preference, in fact I'm often more intrigued by people who have interests that are outside my own, I think there's a sense of none-competitiveness in this.

Yeah desire for mutual interests probably isn't type related, in my experience early on in life you want someone with exactly the same interests then later on realize that's not necessarily what you need in a partner.

What I was getting at with my question was, are EII's more inclined than your average type to require someone to show an interest in them before reciprocating?
Also I've observed that EII's are less likely to have unrequited crush's than other types, but it's probably a silly observation and more to do with EII's being quite reserved and possibly selective as to who they would reveal that information to.

Anyways, outside of my yabbering, I think most, if not all, EII's will show interest by first confirming an interest in wanting to maintain contact and depending on how much they like and trust you, will open-up about personal sentiments in hopes of narrowing the gap, making that attempt at starting a relationship based on a rather deep interpersonal level and seeing how the other person deals with that.
In my case, people who show insensitivity or/and make attempts at contorting by feelings when I'm trying to be sincere are no longer regarded as relationship material

Very compatible with the way I approach things . Starting delta relationships may be a complicated process but if it's right it should just work. Lol i'm not sure if this thread has given me any special insight but it's very interesting to read so many responses similar to my own experiences.

[eunice]

What I was getting at with my question was, are EII's more inclined than your average type to require someone to show an interest in them before reciprocating?
Also I've observed that EII's are less likely to have unrequited crush's than other types, but it's probably a silly observation and more to do with EII's being quite reserved and possibly selective as to who they would reveal that information to.

I have never made the first move so far, but this is mainly because I have not met someone whom I like (in terms of romantic interest). When a guy appears to display some interest in me, I will not reciprocate back if I don't feel the same way so that he would not develop the wrong impression that I'm interested in him as well. I will probably avoid him till he gets the message.

[moredhel]

the aristocracy comes in at some point. Fi types seem to do it about certain "perceived static qualities", as in, the things that don't change about someone, and making an evaluation off of what they see as "who someone really is", with some sort of emotional calculus about their perceived ability to grow or change and how that fits in with their own "direction" or code of ethics.

For delta STs, the same things happens, it's just more.......... is this 'working' or not. Does this seem profitable? More a matter of increase vs loss, actual dynamic statistics that are more cumulative in a micro sense, compared to the NF's macro highlighting of imporant traits or trait development patterns or predictions.


It's the same thing, just different preferences for which data to interpret or see as "meaningful". The same decision.

You have single handedly made me believe in sub-types UDP. I take it you associate more with LSE-Te?

Anyway, ouch, comparing delta-st attraction to profit and loss. The cumulative statistics is a nice touch though, I often find myself breaking down compatibility with someone into mathematics. Your description is accurate if you assume we are evaluating someone purely objectively (well as objective as you can get when considering relationships subjective to your person), although I can't speak for SLI's I assume there might be some differences there.

Attraction starts becoming a lot less rational very quickly once it actually exists.

The socionics of attraction is an interesting topic though...

[UDP]

You have single handedly made me believe in sub-types UDP.

Why do you say that? You're sensing a difference between us?

I take it you associate more with LSE-Te?

No, actually. I think director Abbie is a good example of a Te-LSE, and perhaps even Expat and SmilingEyes being Te subtpes of Te dominants. They are much more dry, and Minde, who is Fi-EII to perhaps the most extreme measure, seems to enjoy conversation with them better, so those things lead me to believe I'm not Te subtype if there is one.

I think the difference between you and I has to do with, perhaps, our enneagram types. I am assuredly not a 9w1, and perhaps my "brashness" of 8ness comes off as more unsettling in how I present thing.

Not that I'm particularly going in that direction, but, have you considered you are a delta NF? And/or, which are you more sure of, being 9w1 or LSE-Si ?

As I say below, though, I think in my that post, it was a more or less isolated Te commentary on the process - but it was on purpose. Thus, I don't think that me writing that post particularly implies I'm a Te subtype.

Anyway, ouch, comparing delta-st attraction to profit and loss.

Why ouch?

The cumulative statistics is a nice touch though, I often find myself breaking down compatibility with someone into mathematics. Your description is accurate if you assume we are evaluating someone purely objectively (well as objective as you can get when considering relationships subjective to your person), although I can't speak for SLI's I assume there might be some differences there.

Attraction starts becoming a lot less rational very quickly once it actually exists.

The socionics of attraction is an interesting topic though...

To be honest, I wasn't trying to describe 'what people think' when they are determining attraction or interest, I was saying how they think. I was trying to address the actual mechanics of how they make decisions, which is something different than the actual emotions and feelings and sort of first person experience of the attraction; I was trying to describe "the function" of the attraction process, rather than the "result" or "output" of the attraction process.

Of course attraction is not entirely a "rational, logical" thing. But humans still operate as they do.


I also don't know how much there is a "socionics of attraction"; as in, there are certain things that socionics doesn't cover, and can't be stretched to cover. FWIW What I attempted to present in my post-of-topic was, yes, in fact, a very perspective on how things work from a mechanical standpoint. It is limited to being of a particularly mechanical nature. But that was it's purpose.

[Creepy-female]

This reminds me of when I put a second sour cream lemon pie that was this guy's grandparents recipe on the hood of his car with an I'm sorry note because I was too shy to knock on the door and go in the house and his sister had found the first pie and the family had ate it before he found it. I made them as an apology for telling him he could go trim his lawn with scissors or do anything but contact me because he told me awkwardly "Well, I have to go the dump!" after I had gone to his house to say hi and give him a hand drawn portrait of himself as a baby a week after I had confessed my love to him over Myspace and he had said "I feel the same way". I wouldn't have tried so hard but his family kept insisting that he liked me and was super shy. Part of me lols at the whole thing and part of me thinks that if that serves as a metaphor for my efforts in the romance arena I should shoot myself in the head. I'll leave the baking to the Delta NFs. /wrists

[moredhel]

Why do you say that? You're sensing a difference between us?

Yes, perhaps not a functional difference but it seemed to correspond with my view of the LSE subtypes.

Not to cause any offense but I think this quote from the Te subtype description applies to your forum posts,

The logical subtype is efficient, correct, dry in dialogue, has a strict appearance and is unapproachable. They’re serious and restrained, not inclined to jokes.

The rest of the description seems to fit as well. Not to suggest that how you present yourself on a forum necessarily corresponds to who you are IRL.

No, actually. I think director Abbie is a good example of a Te-LSE, and perhaps even Expat and SmilingEyes being Te subtpes of Te dominants. They are much more dry, and Minde, who is Fi-EII to perhaps the most extreme measure, seems to enjoy conversation with them better, so those things lead me to believe I'm not Te subtype if there is one.

I know that when breaking things down into 32 types behavior should theoretically be getting fairly consistent between people of the same type but I would still say everyone is going to be a bit different particularly in an artificial environment like a forum.

I think the difference between you and I has to do with, perhaps, our enneagram types. I am assuredly not a 9w1, and perhaps my "brashness" of 8ness comes off as more unsettling in how I present thing.

This defiantly makes sense.

Not that I'm particularly going in that direction, but, have you considered you are a delta NF? And/or, which are you more sure of, being 9w1 or LSE-Si ?

If there were a line between a delta's ST functions and their NF functions I would be closer to the border sure, but still a long ways off being a delta NF. I'm more sure of LSE-Si the 9w1 description mentions a lot of dreamy spirituality which I don't really associate with.

As I say below, though, I think in my that post, it was a more or less isolated Te commentary on the process - but it was on purpose. Thus, I don't think that me writing that post particularly implies I'm a Te subtype.

That's a good point, I have put a pure Te commentary forward on occasions. It just seems to be a consistent trait in you. Every post seems to be well thought out and almost completely objective.

Why ouch?

Ouch for breaking down human attraction to a cold concept like profit vs loss.
Not to say it's inaccurate just, subjectively speaking, cold.
I guess i'm used to sugar coating human behavioral concepts when discussing them with people they may apply to. It's the only way to get people to agree to certain things about themselves .

To be honest, I wasn't trying to describe 'what people think' when they are determining attraction or interest, I was saying how they think. I was trying to address the actual mechanics of how they make decisions, which is something different than the actual emotions and feelings and sort of first person experience of the attraction; I was trying to describe "the function" of the attraction process, rather than the "result" or "output" of the attraction process.

Fair enough, quite valid for considering how Te Si and Fi Ne process the concept of attraction in that case.

Of course attraction is not entirely a "rational, logical" thing. But humans still operate as they do.

But I think the irrational part comes from how you're other functions, in particular your Super-id functions,factor into your thought process. I still think it can be analysed and would make a interesting topic of discussion. I guess my point was that you were considering ego functions in isolation, which is cool (and very Te).

[Marie84]

What I was getting at with my question was, are EII's more inclined than your average type to require someone to show an interest in them before reciprocating?

I can't really speak for other EII's, or other types on this for that matter, but I generally tend to believe that if someone is initiating interaction with me rather persistently that they have a clear interest in me.
So, the interest is observed through the other person initiating rather than emotional cues like making facial gestures from across a room or what not (which I probably won't even notice or feel too embarrassed to stare at)

Also I've observed that EII's are less likely to have unrequited crush's than other types, but it's probably a silly observation and more to do with EII's being quite reserved and possibly selective as to who they would reveal that information to.

Maybe, but I could see a lot of people from all types falling into this same predicament.


I also want to butt-in to the whole subtype discussion going on here and say that it's really not worth obsessing about. Sometimes "boxing-in" people can go a bit too far with typology, especially since it's a heavily way of thinking in the first place

[moredhel]

I also want to butt-in to the whole subtype discussion going on here and say that it's really not worth obsessing about. Sometimes "boxing-in" people can go a bit too far with typology, especially since it's a heavily way of thinking in the first place

Yeah I never really gave subtype much thought, just a means of attempting to explain why people of the same type didn't always act the same.
I still don't give it much weight, it just seemed to fit well in this case. Although I'd be happy to give subtype more weight if I see enough instances of it ringing true, I mean if it's right it's right.
Still the idea of anything beyond a 2 subtype system makes me as going overboard.

[Suz]

This reminds me of when I put a second sour cream lemon pie that was this guy's grandparents recipe on the hood of his car with an I'm sorry note because I was too shy to knock on the door and go in the house and his sister had found the first pie and the family had ate it before he found it. I made them as an apology for telling him he could go trim his lawn with scissors or do anything but contact me because he told me awkwardly "Well, I have to go the dump!" after I had gone to his house to say hi and give him a hand drawn portrait of himself as a baby a week after I had confessed my love to him over Myspace and he had said "I feel the same way". I wouldn't have tried so hard but his family kept insisting that he liked me and was super shy. Part of me lols at the whole thing and part of me thinks that if that serves as a metaphor for my efforts in the romance arena I should shoot myself in the head. I'll leave the baking to the Delta NFs. /wrists

wow that was a really long sentence in there!!

But sweet story....

[UDP]

Why do you say that? You're sensing a difference between us?

Yes, perhaps not a functional difference but it seemed to correspond with my view of the LSE subtypes.

Not to cause any offense but I think this quote from the Te subtype description applies to your forum posts,



The rest of the description seems to fit as well. Not to suggest that how you present yourself on a forum necessarily corresponds to who you are IRL.

Sure. I think it depends on what forum experience you're talking about - I just made a huge bit of joking in delta lounge. And if you as people like Lobo (or even Minde, although it seems to generally be too much for her), I am different than what you comment on here.

But when I explain things, I tend to go into a very Te oriented things, and yes, I personally look at socionics through a Te lens because I think that's the way it makes the most sense to me and is most applicable. Of course, I'm probably concerned with socionics for why I see it as applicable, (or, apply-able) or not. . .

I know that when breaking things down into 32 types behavior should theoretically be getting fairly consistent between people of the same type but I would still say everyone is going to be a bit different particularly in an artificial environment like a forum.

Sure. Furthermore, your observation of me (or anyone else) is dependent on what you know about me in general. Until you know a person in a more complete way, you won't understand the nature of what causes variations as per the stimuli they encounter.

If there were a line between a delta's ST functions and their NF functions I would be closer to the border sure, but still a long ways off being a delta NF. I'm more sure of LSE-Si the 9w1 description mentions a lot of dreamy spirituality which I don't really associate with.

Your response leaves you in a curious situation (to where I see you).

That's a good point, I have put a pure Te commentary forward on occasions. It just seems to be a consistent trait in you. Every post seems to be well thought out and almost completely objective.

Well, that's cool. (although the nature of that statement seems curious, too, because I can think of several posts where I'm anything but objective). I hope your opinion of me doesn't shatter when you see my Deez Nuts jokes.

Ouch for breaking down human attraction to a cold concept like profit vs loss.
Not to say it's inaccurate just, subjectively speaking, cold.
I guess i'm used to sugar coating human behavioral concepts when discussing them with people they may apply to. It's the only way to get people to agree to certain things about themselves .

That's true, and definitely something that smacks of E9 energy
These are speculations, but, you may not be used to communications that are not as 'conditioned' towards catering to 'feelings' like that.

One question I am wondering about is how much of your being that way is something conditioned (especially so if you've spent a lot of time around delta NFs in a way where they were 'superior' to you and had to conform to them), or other people, particularly Fe valuing people, that can ingrain a sense of cautiousness.

A really interesting, to be honest, is that I sometimes am that way EXTREMELY, when I'm in certain relational situations that I'm not comfortable with. I actually get very concerned about how I come across to people, and typically fail at saying anything constructive. I think a 'big deal' is how "I" (or deltas in general, especially STs) 'feel' or 'are sure of' their relationship to someone else --- I say delta STs because they often are clueless or left wanting someone else to SAY what it is.


....anyway, I'm at a point in my life where I simply prefer to not sugar coat things, and I've had enough experience in doing so where I'm prepared to people's reactions, most of which are unpleasant. Most people don't like their 'workings' talked about in certain ways, or any ounce of someone telling 'you' how 'you' work, which I understand and even relate to. But it's a choice I make and a risk I take because I think it can be worth it.



Fair enough, quite valid for considering how Te Si and Fi Ne process the concept of attraction in that case.

Of course attraction is not entirely a "rational, logical" thing. But humans still operate as they do.

But I think the irrational part comes from how you're other functions, in particular your Super-id functions,factor into your thought process. I still think it can be analysed and would make a interesting topic of discussion. I guess my point was that you were considering ego functions in isolation, which is cool (and very Te).

The irrational part (even as socionics would say) comes from the actual irrational elements; thus 'erotic roles' and such.

And then, there are elements of attraction that are simply beyond what socionics says. A really really really overweight person who smells bad and looks very sickly isn't going to be attractive to a lot of people. You can stretch "well that seems to be bad Si on their part, that's not comfortable", or "I doubt that person would be relationally consistent (Fi)", or "Lazy, unproductive! (Te)", but, that's sort of...... getting a bit much. Maybe someone is simply a hottie. Maybe you admire them for some reason. Etc.


....However, I wasn't considering ego functions in isolation. I was considering them in a whole type situation, thus my remarks on aristocracy and other things. What I focused on was something very much related to the ego block in terms of "how a type rationalizes their actions". And even more so in terms of commentary about a long term process of judging things, which I derived from somavision's post..... "until it hits a kind of critical mass and everthing is known to be good.... or not. So I wouldn't take what I said as a stand-alone commentary on "how delta sts and NFs approach all relational situations.

[UDP]

[quote=Marie84;801714]

What I was getting at with my question was, are EII's more inclined than your average type to require someone to show an interest in them before reciprocating?

I can't really speak for other EII's, or other types on this for that matter, but I generally tend to believe that if someone is initiating interaction with me rather persistently that they have a clear interest in me.
So, the interest is observed through the other person initiating rather than emotional cues like making facial gestures from across a room or what not (which I probably won't even notice or feel too embarrassed to stare at)

Also I've observed that EII's are less likely to have unrequited crush's than other types, but it's probably a silly observation and more to do with EII's being quite reserved and possibly selective as to who they would reveal that information to.

Maybe, but I could see a lot of people from all types falling into this same predicament.

Here's something 'unobjective' and that won't win me any favor, but


I know a lot of EIIs who have (IMO) irrational fears of being alone, of not finding someone, of pursuing something and coming up short or being intimidated. There are a lot on this very forum. It's this very strange thing. I personally find it a bit cute, because I'm drawn to that, and I like the idea of proving them wrong. But there is this sort of EII "I'm gonna be an old maid!" thing that exists to some extent.

I think some of it is self esteem issues, and some of it is, if there are enough relational situations or "disappointments" in other people, EIIs can get very discouraged and assume that "nothing will change". AKA the "IJ everything sucks state" or "everything sucks and is going to suck for a long time because I'm in a rut and it doesn't matter what happens things just suck right now and really I'm worrying that I cannot enact significant change in my life so therefore I'm justified things are going to suck FOREVER" - state. I think they rob themselves of a lot of opportunity this way and tend to want to chase them out of this state as much as possible.... but I guess that's why I'm their dual ?

I also think it's a delta NF cop out where, once they have a "prediction" or "very clear pattern" in their mind that leads to some inevitable conclusion, they start feeling justified in whatever their decisions or actions or feelings are... and sometimes tend to not want to acknowledge flaws in their "predictions" or "patterns", because i would invalidate their 'feelings'. Delta NFs that don't want to get better at life will tend to linger in those states and be depressed. Those that do get better at recognizing them and pushing through them.

I also want to butt-in to the whole subtype discussion going on here and say that it's really not worth obsessing about. Sometimes "boxing-in" people can go a bit too far with typology, especially since it's a heavily way of thinking in the first place

Geez Marie. Always butting in like this, huh?
I hope you brought more cookies with your intrusion, this time

[mu4]

I met some caregiver women tend to be very high initiation. I think sometimes they come on really strong, esp delta ST's, too strong for me usually esp from LSE's because they aren't really very charming to me.

I think Alpha SF's are just as high initiating esp ESE's, but they are more demure and charming which is attractive to me.

I've met many delta's who seem to be have many short relationships but stay friends after it ends.