I have no interest in my duals? Does anybody really like them?

[Saberstorm]

I have no real interest in my duals? Does anybody really like their duals?

The only women I tend to like are very feminine, very sweet girls that are introverted and imaginative. But I go through phases, and I used to like sexually aggressive Se types. I have never really had any interest in Alpha SFs.

Basically, I seem to like delta and beta NFs...



This part of the theory seems to be not working out for me. I really do not even care about the theory of duality. Anybody else disinterested in the dual thing?

[xerx]

I like my duals.

Are you an extrovert or introvert? Extroverts are supposed to think that their duals are a bit simple at first.

Also, are you sure you're not mistyped?

Also, are you just interested in sex or in long-term relationship?

Also, Alpha SFs can be highly sexual from what I've seen.

[Esaman]

More likable and lovable than other types? Definately.
More atractive than other types? Not really.

[Absurd]

I have no real interest in my duals?

Good for you.

[malna]

I hardly meet my duals irl. Likely we're occupying two separate planes of reality.

[some chair]

Given that intertypes, ironically, seem to be the most arbitrary aspect of Socionics, your opinion plays nicely into mine. I want to agree wholeheartedly, but I'm obliged not to for the sake of not being bound to a narrow interpretation of reality

Whether I agree or not? I like Big Five extraverts, especially when they're trying to get me to like them. But then, I like introverts too, at least when they're high on openness. I almost universally dislike people low on agreeableness. Neuroticism is a mixed bag, and I think it's based on how the person's openness colours how I perceive them as a whole.

People seem most attracted to me for my openness. If I had to fit it to socionics, I'd say people would be drawn to me for being an NF. The harsh reality is that introverts experience the devil effect, being seen as less attractive/friendly/likeable/intelligent across the board simply due to being less socially involved and emotionally demonstrative (if anyone cares, I can go fish up the paper on this), so an extravert being interested in me begins and ends with my ability to make contact with the world and show off how interesting and friendly I am.

Socionics' notion of duality is pretty naive, in my opinion. It needs to be scrapped. The idea that an arbitrary dichotomy determines who is compatible with and attracted to whom is bizarre It gets worse when you consider that duality in part is an excuse for people to be weak and immature. You should not be relying on someone to come along and fix you up or tolerate your failings as an individual and a participant in society.

Malna also brings up an excellent point. Depending on your type, you may never, ever be involved with something that brings you in contact with your duals. I'm lucky to be in a melting pot group with a diverse representation of the types, with Alphas, Gammas, and Betas. No SLEs.

Anyway, that's my angy rant. To whoever's reading this, it's an ask, but if you're going to disagree with me, let's keep a cool head and talk through my points, ok? If you get angry reading this, I'm sorry. I'm not attacking you or condemning your opinions. This is just the way I see things so far.

[DaftPunk]

I have no real interest in my duals? Does anybody really like their duals?

The only women I tend to like are very feminine, very sweet girls that are introverted and imaginative. But I go through phases, and I used to like sexually aggressive Se types. I have never really had any interest in Alpha SFs.

Basically, I seem to like delta and beta NFs...



This part of the theory seems to be not working out for me. I really do not even care about the theory of duality. Anybody else disinterested in the dual thing?

Maybe you're ST

[squirreltual]

I didn't think duality was about instantaneous attraction/what you think you want, but more about harmony anyway?

[Beautiful sky]

I like my duals very much, I don't like the insane ones who don't control the mean and aggressive behaviors of their terrible friends.

[InvisibleJim]

I hate everyone equally, especially mah dauls.

[applejacks]

I didn't think duality was about instantaneous attraction/what you think you want, but more about harmony anyway?

I really like your point here. If understand correctly, isn't it common to walk past a dual because it's not someone that would catch your attention anyways?
@Saberstorm - Also, are we talking long term relations? Do you find yourself attracted to those sexually aggressive Se types for long?

A friend of mine always told me- "You're going to marry someone crazy- period. It's all about the kind of crazy you can handle." Some people may want a dual, others may prefer an identical... it just depends on what you can live with, and what won't drive you up the wall.

I dated an identical once. His car was a mess like mine, his house was destroyed, he had a worse attention span than I did, and I couldn't relax and enjoy all the many, many hours of wonderful conversation with him because I was too caught up worrying about who would take care of the nitty gritty responsibilities, which I certainly didn't want to do for the rest of my life. Might seem petty, but I could see it unfolding in my mind, coming home to a disaster, being upset, him charming me out of it, and then the two of us struggling to pay attention long enough to pick things up. He always said he wanted to marry a best friend, and I would silently think to myself that I already had friends.

So it just depends on what flavor of life you'd like to experience, I suppose!

[Esaman]

Given that intertypes, ironically, seem to be the most arbitrary aspect of Socionics, your opinion plays nicely into mine. I want to agree wholeheartedly, but I'm obliged not to for the sake of not being bound to a narrow interpretation of reality

Whether I agree or not? I like Big Five extraverts, especially when they're trying to get me to like them. But then, I like introverts too, at least when they're high on openness. I almost universally dislike people low on agreeableness. Neuroticism is a mixed bag, and I think it's based on how the person's openness colours how I perceive them as a whole.

People seem most attracted to me for my openness. If I had to fit it to socionics, I'd say people would be drawn to me for being an NF. The harsh reality is that introverts experience the devil effect, being seen as less attractive/friendly/likeable/intelligent across the board simply due to being less socially involved and emotionally demonstrative (if anyone cares, I can go fish up the paper on this), so an extravert being interested in me begins and ends with my ability to make contact with the world and show off how interesting and friendly I am.

Socionics' notion of duality is pretty naive, in my opinion. It needs to be scrapped. The idea that an arbitrary dichotomy determines who is compatible with and attracted to whom is bizarre It gets worse when you consider that duality in part is an excuse for people to be weak and immature. You should not be relying on someone to come along and fix you up or tolerate your failings as an individual and a participant in society.

Malna also brings up an excellent point. Depending on your type, you may never, ever be involved with something that brings you in contact with your duals. I'm lucky to be in a melting pot group with a diverse representation of the types, with Alphas, Gammas, and Betas. No SLEs.

Anyway, that's my angy rant. To whoever's reading this, it's an ask, but if you're going to disagree with me, let's keep a cool head and talk through my points, ok? If you get angry reading this, I'm sorry. I'm not attacking you or condemning your opinions. This is just the way I see things so far.

Socionics is about informational metabolism intra- and interpersonal. Figuring out relational compatibility was it's focus from inception. If theory and arguably knowledge of human compatibility crams your style I recommend you go back to MBTI.

So after stating your ignorant and arrogant opinion, that includes proposal to scrap integral part of socionics, using such words as 'naive' and 'bizarre', you have the balls to suggest that people shouldn't be angry with you since it is just an opinion.. Manipulative little shit.

[glam]

i notice my duals, like & understand them, can continue to maintain good relations while the rest of their relationships are falling apart....

however i don't usually find myself attracted to them in the romantic sense - they really can be huge meatheads.

instead i end up attracted to (intelligent) intuitive types, including ones that are probably not-so-good for me, e.g. EII

[some chair]

I don't come from MBTI, I come from a casual interest in current personality psychology. I'm sceptical because Socionics doesn't seem to follow any kind of sound internal logic. I mean sincerely when I say the dichotomies seem arbitrary. Why do "fields" complement "objects"? It doesn't make any sense to me based on what I know.

I ask to talk calmly, and that's exactly what you're not doing. I said I wasn't attacking or condemning the theory, and I was--and still am--being quite sincere. Is the honesty throwing you? My apologies--I read something recently that changes the way I read text. I'm sorry as well if my word choice comes across differently than the way I read them to myself.

My opinions are just an opinion, much as yours are. As far as I can see, Socionics is so subjective as to only exist within people's imaginations. To be fair, that gives it a kind of factual validity, and that's respectable enough.

[Saberstorm]

I do not fit perfectly into any of these personality types. I feel similar to LIIs IEIs LIEs and IEEs. Basically, I am a "result-style" intuitive. No personality really grabs me. I want something like an ESE/SLE/ESI/SLI. I also feel as if I value any feeling function Fi or Fe from my partner!

[Saberstorm]

Duality feels like employer - employee relationship. The intuitive sets the vision and the sensor implements it. How do you connect when the other person does not elaborate on your dreams? I also need to interweave my imagination with somebody, I do not see sensors really doing that. They help implement the agenda. I want an intuitive to play with me.

[anndelise]

I don't come from MBTI, I come from a casual interest in current personality psychology. I'm sceptical because Socionics doesn't seem to follow any kind of sound internal logic. I mean sincerely when I say the dichotomies seem arbitrary. Why do "fields" complement "objects"? It doesn't make any sense to me based on what I know.

There are a few ways to approach the fields/object compatibility thing. Xi/Xe.

Pure object orientation would be jumping from object to object, person to person, event to event, etc without grasping a pattern nor seeing how things connect. Like seeing ears, nose, eyes, legs, tail, but not comparing them with anything (an Xi acitivty) to get the idea of big ears, long nose, wirey tail, huge feet, nor of seeing how they all fit together into a larger object known as an elephant. Pure Xe would also block you from realizing that that elephant is charging (speed comparison) towards you (direction of orientation to another object) and is about to crush you (projection of relative speed, distance, timing, etc).

Pure field orientation wouldn't recognize that objects are in relationships with other objects. There'd be no concept of object, hence nothing is relating to nothing.

So, as individuals, we need them both to process info about the world we are in. Socionics has each type being made up of Xi and Xe. Some types are more strongly oriented to Xe than Xi..they are the ones who jump easily from topic to topic, activity to activity, etc. some types are more oriented towards Xi than Xe..they are the ones who go more in depth on a topic, an activity, etc. But they each must deal with Xe and Xi info to survive.
----

Another way of looking at Xe/Xi compatibility is in terms of intertype relationships. And this, I believe, has much to do with competing information. Competing may not be the right term, so don't take it too literally. I will use Ne and Si as my examples here.

According to aspectonics, N deals with information that is implicit and abstract. S deals with information that is explicit and involved. There is no competition with the information they deal with. T deals with information which is absteact and explicit. There is competition. N and T are both attending to abstract information, but the N is looking for the implicitness of the info, T is looking for the explicitness of the info. When communicating, they are at risk of conflicting with each other regarding implicit vs explicit. T is also at risk of conflicting with S in that S is attending to the involvment, while T is abstracting away from involvment. They are similar...and yet that similarity also leads to conflict due to differing aspects.

Xe/Xi have a similar thing going. For example, Ne and Ni. Both deal with implicit and abstract info. But one is dealing with implict and abstract objects, the other with implicit and abstract fields. Together there is nothing to ground either of them, and it might initially seem as if they are on the same wavelength...implicit&abstract info. But their Xe/Xi would come into conflict before they realized it was happening.

However, link that Ne up with Si:
Ne= implict, abstract, object, static
Si= explicit, involved, field, dynamic
There is no conflict regarding information. Neither is competing with the other over particular type of information. And each covers info which the other is not attending to...making them complimentary..or two sides of the coin of reality.

Admittedly, they are both integral (aka perceiving) types, but this has more to do with the breaking down of info into discrete parts (J) and building up info into an integral whole (P). This is something that every type does. These two (Ne and Si) are complimentary in that they are both doing this in a similar style...i want to use 'in-sync' but that's not right. It's like...ummm...ok, Fi and Si share involved and field aspects. This puts them in a 'conflict'. This acceptable conflict IF it is not a consistent issue. As in, say...if 75% of the time they are in Si/Fi...it will take its toll. But if they are only 25% in Si/Fi (75% Si/Ne) then it is not as big of a toll. (Note, please dont take the numbers as being more than an analogy for the concept i was trying to get across.)

------

And another way of looking at Xe/Xi is in terms of extroversion/introversion, which some people associate it with. An extrovert jumps from object to object, but objects don't require much to grasp and get boring rather quickly. And a person who sticks with one topic, no matter how in depth, is at risk of being bored and/or stuck in a rut...narrow viewed, etc. So the extroverted type helps push the introverted type out of their rut, expand their world, etc. While the introverted type helps ground the extrovert towards looking at something a little more in depth...less superficially.

Otherwise you have like two (or more) extroverts activating each other's object jumping and superficiallness, or two (or more) introverts pulling each other deeper into their own worlds. But it's usually not a shared world...it's two (or more) deep internal worlds...because it would require one of them to step out of own world to join the other's, even temporarily.

So, again, that is one way in which Xe and Xi compliment each other.

[FoxOnStilts]

Duality feels like employer - employee relationship. The intuitive sets the vision and the sensor implements it.

I wish that was the case.

[Saberstorm]

I wish that was the case.

LOL! You have such lazy duals! ILE says "Implement my vision." SEI says, "Do you want corn chips?"

[anndelise]

My bf, (SiFe) does a lot to help me implement my ideas. And considering how many ideas I get, that is saying a lot about his love for me, lol.
We may not be duals, but I wouldn't change him.

[Cuddly McFluffles]

Socionics' notion of duality is pretty naive, in my opinion. It needs to be scrapped. The idea that an arbitrary dichotomy determines who is compatible with and attracted to whom is bizarre It gets worse when you consider that duality in part is an excuse for people to be weak and immature. You should not be relying on someone to come along and fix you up or tolerate your failings as an individual and a participant in society.

At its core, duality is basically a comfortable exchange of information that, all other factors being equal, is the most complementary interaction you can find. It's not a prescription for everlasting love, amicability, or even tolerance. It doesn't guarantee automatic or lasting attraction. There are still things to consider like age, relative maturity, values, socioeconomic status, etc, when considering compatibility between people; socionics is only one facet of the whole thing. Believe me, I was raised by a potential dual (otherwise semi-dual). We have ways in which we do wonderfully, typically where our values are aligned. Where they aren't, we clash horribly.

Concerning duality as an excuse, you aren't the first/only one to complain about that. I guess it depends on what you're looking for. Some would argue that it is most productive to focus on honing your strengths rather than focusing on weaknesses that may never drastically improve.

You refer to duality as being based on an "arbitrary dichotomy". Where have you learned about socionics, particularly duality?

[Esaman]

I ask to talk calmly, and that's exactly what you're not doing.

And I am not doing it exactly because you assume that you should get it just by asking even though you don't deserve it, while in obvious disconnection from reality and particularly role opinions and emotions play in it.

Starting from the ridiculous:

said I wasn't attacking or condemning the theory

....You most definitely did ... and it is ok, but denying it or not being aware of it isn't. In the same tune, I don't particularly care if you are strong-worded and offensive about your oppinions, but then requesting and expecting mild response is just ill.

just an opinion

You repeat, but in reality when opinion is pronounced it is proposition and a vote to change consensus and behavior. Always so and undeniably so in your expressed opinion:

It needs to be scrapped

Are you going to say that those are "just words" and that you floating in clouds of imagination spewing words carrying no meaningful connection to reality? Well, that may be so, but that doesn't prevent them from having consequences in reality. For such consequences there is place for evaluations such as anger.

I went to such lengths because you present a clear case of annoying and disappointing syndrome I have seen in IEIs (and in lesser degree ILIs) whose potential of internalizing the world I am in awe of.

Now, to socionics.
You ask 'how' for compatibility, but do you even know exactly how elements and type itself exist?
Well, neither do I, but nor do I need to. Description and prediction are useful by themselves without the knowledge of how exactly.
General logic of compatibility is also solid without having to know exact details. If you accept as evident that human mind have multiple faculties and methods to process information that complement or conflict with each other everything else follows.

[FoxOnStilts]

LOL! You have such lazy duals! ILE says "Implement my vision." SEI says, "Do you want corn chips?"

Yeah, he's not really much of an implementer as an enabler. Anytime I say anything or suggest anything, his response is, "Okay, sure, go ahead."

"I want to go to Hawaii."
"Okay, sure. Go ahead."
"I want to cut down the tree outback and make a fort out of it."
"Okay, sure. Go ahead."
"Instead of worrying about moving the couch out of the small room, I want to burn it so we don't have to."
"Okay sur---- wait. No. Not that."

[anndelise]

Yeah, he's not really much of an implementer as an enabler. Anytime I say anything or suggest anything, his response is, "Okay, sure, go ahead."

"I want to go to Hawaii."
"Okay, sure. Go ahead."
"I want to cut down the tree outback and make a fort out of it."
"Okay, sure. Go ahead."
"Instead of worrying about moving the couch out of the small room, I want to burn it so we don't have to."
"Okay sur---- wait. No. Not that."

Ahh, see there is a difference between implementing something you think of, and helping you implement it.
With my SiFe, he knows I am going to do it, one way or another.
There are obvious parts that i need help in, where it is easy for him to do. Like recently when i was marking up a felt square with the intent to cut it to the size i needed and then mark hexes into it for movement guidelines because one of my current ideas is to learn how to make board games. Anyways, it took me almost a freaking hour to get the square lined up, and then i realized i had made a mistake on dimensions so had to erase it all. He came home, i told him what i was trying to do and where i had erred. I stepped away to destress, then came back 5 min later and the felt piece was all cut to the appropriate size for me.

And then, when i had to line up circles so i could mark the dots for the hexes, i don't have great fine motor control so I kept bumping pieces out of position and getting frustrated. So he came over, i held the guideline and he got the circles in perfect position for me so i could make the marks. It took us about half an hour to get it all done, but it would have taken me days to do it on my own.

And best of all..there was no grumbling and growling from him about it.

[some chair]

At its core, duality is basically a comfortable exchange of information that, all other factors being equal, is the most complementary interaction you can find. It's not a prescription for everlasting love, amicability, or even tolerance. It doesn't guarantee automatic or lasting attraction. There are still things to consider like age, relative maturity, values, socioeconomic status, etc, when considering compatibility between people; socionics is only one facet of the whole thing. Believe me, I was raised by a potential dual (otherwise semi-dual). We have ways in which we do wonderfully, typically where our values are aligned. Where they aren't, we clash horribly.

In the context of what anndelise said above, I understand now, thanks

Concerning duality as an excuse, you aren't the first/only one to complain about that. I guess it depends on what you're looking for. Some would argue that it is most productive to focus on honing your strengths rather than focusing on weaknesses that may never drastically improve.

Your weaknesses may not ever improve, but equally they may. Why gamble on something that hasn't been poured in a cup and measured?

As an example, the rate at which I think and process my surroundings is measurably below average (a bit shy of 60% of people are faster thinkers), and this held my mental arithmetic back all through school. Why stop at "well I'm just a slow thinker"? Why not push myself to do arithmetic more quickly? Why not push myself through highly abstract and logical mathematics, as something of a labour of love?

I don't necessarily disagree, though. I'm not a naturally conscientious person. I wasn't raised that way. I don't particularly see that changing; instead I'm moving my life toward not needing to be a hard worker. In my imagination, duality is just an excuse to be weak. Perhaps it's simply an expression of my disappointment with myself.

In the sense that we only have so many hours in a day and so little life to throw at the things we love, or what we hate about ourselves, I accept duality. I suppose I just dislike it

On the other hand, the beliefs we hold alter the way we relate with ourselves and the world, and I have my reservations about Socionics coddling one's failings.

You refer to duality as being based on an "arbitrary dichotomy". Where have you learned about socionics, particularly duality?

Nowhere recently. I can't verbalise any claims about duality, but the intertypes don't seem to follow from the functions. Of course, if duality is simply a lack of collision, I have nothing to say other than that it's seemingly a tautology that goes nowhere

[anndelise]

Nowhere recently. I can't verbalise any claims about duality, but the intertypes don't seem to follow from the functions. Of course, if duality is simply a lack of collision, I have nothing to say other than that it's seemingly a tautology that goes nowhere

Theoretically, the intertypes do follow from the functions. But I've never followed the specific intertype relations as if they described every sample of that type. For example, the duality of NeFi with SiTe would differ in actual interaction than the duality of NiFe with SeTi. Similar goes for supervision relationships and all the other relationships. However, yes, there are theoretical similarities.

The duality is not merely a lack of collision. As you mentioned, there is only so many hours in the day, and so little life to throw at the things we want for ourselves. (Yeah, i modified the last part.) Basically, there is only so much time, and so much energy available to us to pursue the things we want to pursue, regardless of what that is or why.

Imagine this...you have a specialty, and you have an employee who has his/her own skills and specialties which you are not particularly adept at. And they are not particularly adept at your specialty, skills, abilities. Would you oust them because you want to figure out how to do it all yourself? Or would you find a way to make use of them? To combine the two abilities towards mutual benefit? Does working with them truly make you weaker? Or can it make you...both...stronger? Would a king run his kingdom well if he refused to have any advisors? Or if he lacked a trusted advisor? Would you orefer to be the king? Or the advisor in such a scenario?

I don't know what it is you want from life, so I can't really personalize this for ya.

If you read my story to foxonstilts in this thread, about my SiFe bf helping me do what it is I wanted to do faster, easier, and with less stress, then that is an example of what dual elements offer. It wasn't cuz i can't do it...it just would have taken me longer, not been as aesthetically done, and would have used up so much mental energy that I would have felt drained and maybe not considered continuing my interest. But as was...he did what he is good at, what he has no problems doing, and that left me so much more energy left over to continue myself. Which is what he enjoys being able to offer me. So it is a win-win for us both. Si/Ne wise that is.

[some chair]

I'll have to get back to your post once I've put more thought into my answers. I will leave you with this, though: my worldview is such that, between the king and his advisors, I'm the hermit who seceded to the mountains. One in isolation can do evil only unto himself

[lemontrees]

Duality feels like employer - employee relationship. The intuitive sets the vision and the sensor implements it. How do you connect when the other person does not elaborate on your dreams? I also need to interweave my imagination with somebody, I do not see sensors really doing that. They help implement the agenda. I want an intuitive to play with me.

What an intuitive-centric worldview lol.

[anndelise]

I'll have to get back to your post once I've put more thought into my answers. I will leave you with this, though: my worldview is such that, between the king and his advisors, I'm the hermit who seceded to the mountains. One in isolation can do evil only unto himself

Hermithood is a valid option. So why aren't you a hermit yet?

No problem...i think that last post was kinda wonked and probably repetitive. Sorry if it is.

[Cuddly McFluffles]

Yeah, he's not really much of an implementer as an enabler. Anytime I say anything or suggest anything, his response is, "Okay, sure, go ahead."

"I want to go to Hawaii."
"Okay, sure. Go ahead."
"I want to cut down the tree outback and make a fort out of it."
"Okay, sure. Go ahead."
"Instead of worrying about moving the couch out of the small room, I want to burn it so we don't have to."
"Okay sur---- wait. No. Not that."

That's one thing I recall reading about SEI and ILE... somewhere. Basically, it said that ILE often just voices ideas without necessarily meaning to carry them out, and SEI recognizes that fact and doesn't try to help them with every single thing they mention.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Feelings for people can be are almost always complicated.

trust can be betrayed
You can grow to slowly despise somebody whom you once respected.
You can lighten up and learn to get to know somebody that you disliked.
You can feel excited over a meeting with a person and be let down, but also the reverse: You can show up to a place you didn't really want to go, and have a good time.
You can hate somebody's asshole qualities but be attracted to them physically... or you just hold onto that small sweet part they do have or your brain is telling you they have. maybe they don't really have a genuinely nice bone in their body but thinking about anybody as a campy comic book villain is too disheartening. People like that can't exist in 'real life' can they?

You can deeply question your feelings for somebody...that you once had, if they do something that clashes with your personal morals or just shakes your human empathy the wrong way. It's like, then you start questioning yourself because a part of you was probably attracted to their hidden rage all along, but you just liked when it was hidden, when they expressed it... you felt that they cut you off, and the only way you knew how to deal with the loss was to idealize the friendship. And you wonder how much you really liked each other, or if you were just being mutually nice because on this deep subconscious level.. you both were actually terrified of each other.

Oh that's deep.

But yes love. Deep simple pure dual love. It happens. I just like you... you. Your sweetness of you, you excite me. It will end of course, the way a narcissist says that time destroys all. Your heart will be crushed. But for a moment, for a small fleeting moment... romance really is real.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

criticizing what socionicists say about duality, yes I understand and it is constructive to the naive 14 year old girl in us all.

but... the 14 year old girl in us that wants love, even though it's naive and anti-intellectual and stupid, it still is a part in every us. we cannot deny the power of twilight or teenage girliness.

sometimes the 14 year old girl in us needs to be fed. we have to allow ourselves to be innocent, helpless... 14 year old teenage girl caught in a back alley. we have to allow ourselves to be vulnerable to see who has our back the most and who secretly is feeding off our pain. we have to... that's what love is, its essence. being protected for being pathetic.

...or we have to be strong and not use our power to misabuse the innocent. I suppose either/or works. its a simple and pure true tail. The notion of heroism.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

sorry for the TRIPLE POST but i just had another insight...

say you have your typical str8 man. He's loud and brutish and a bully, he enjoys hurting other people's feelings and exercising his authority. When you are uncomfortable it makes him smile and turns him on, and he likes to do shit for attention. He's all male, its about HIM and HIS MONEY and WHAT HE WANTS DAMNIT.

then you have a girl, who though on occassion is a really nasty bitch, loves being nice to people, and climbing the social ranks. she's sweet and innocent and doesn't like fighting... and is the opposite of the man in almost every way, she is nuanced and dignified and refined whereas he is the opposite. but once in awhile while the heterosexual female is in heat, the two heterosexual species will want to fuck each other. most of the time she'll complain about him but still be sexually attracted cause she senses his str8 male dna no matter how evil it is.

Yet , even though these crude stereotypes are true, there's still always a little bit of the girl in the man and a bit of the man in the girl even if they seek each other out/repulsed in an equal fashion, because that's what yin-yang is, that's what duality is, that's what balance is.. that's what humanity is... that's what spirit is... that's what GAYNESS is. pure balance that can't be analyzed away, a holy circle of energy.naturally we are born dualistic creatures, we seek harmony with duals for an even greater spiritual purpose or whatever but the essence is already inside us.

Demons are destroyed by power of three spells because only Oneness exists, not strength. Power is part of that oneness but so is being weak, helpless- female. You combine both and you have captain gayness, the duality ...now i say there is about 30-% of homosexual ppl in the world for 70% of heterosexuals, each time the average str8 couple mates.... a 3 in 10 chance that the kid will be gay thus continuing the cycle, the greatest point is that duality is about a CYCLE.

now you could say its silly for somebody to look for duality in others and not themselves. But to be honest, people are different. Based on lifestyle and how people are raised, it's not so easy for anybody to lift themselves up by the bootstraps like that so I really hate cliched self help book sayings like 'YOU JUST NEED TO LOVE YOURSELF' that is really annoying, and also it feels like the 'advice person' is empathically absorbing the other people's low self esteem too much and trying to like vapidly change it instead of letting it happen naturally. Either way it's kind of annoying , and again on the highest level self confidence or lack of self confidence doesn't exist, only spirit. (gayness) the highest dual knowlege is there is no dual but there are dual forms to understand duality... you find your dual and ironically you give up dualistic thinking... it's a paradox because at the fundmental level it isn't supposed to be rational. It's just supposed to be that pure vanilla shiny thing, i mean the analogy to that; what most people are experiencing when they are experiencing romantic love. Wholeness, completeness, happiness, satisfaction.

okay i'll shut up now.

[Esaman]

love, even though it's naive and anti-intellectual and stupid

I wouldn't say that.

[Cuddly McFluffles]

I wouldn't say that.

I think untempered love is. Of course, I'm talking about love in terms of feelings and attraction. It doesn't operate according to what you "should" feel or wish to feel. It just is. I think of Mulan II (which I dearly hate) as an example of people who are following their heart/feelings/hormones/genitalia when duty and position dictate that they should tell their hormones to shut the hell up and do what is required of them. Realistically, everyone involved in that little fiasco would have been in deep shit. Love without reason is abysmally stupid.

[Cuddly McFluffles]

What do you feed your 14-year old teenage girl, truck? Soup? Crackers? Maybe throw some Cheetos in there for fun?

[Esaman]

Ran out of juice before being able to construct the argument, but now I won't be able to not bother to later.

[Esaman]

I think untempered love is. Of course, I'm talking about love in terms of feelings and attraction. It doesn't operate according to what you "should" feel or wish to feel. It just is. I think of Mulan II (which I dearly hate) as an example of people who are following their heart/feelings/hormones/genitalia when duty and position dictate that they should tell their hormones to shut the hell up and do what is required of them. Realistically, everyone involved in that little fiasco would have been in deep shit. Love without reason is abysmally stupid.

The reasons I say that love is not inherently naive, anti-intellectual and stupid are:
You don't have to be naive about it.
There is plenty of rational and reason in those things. Even if root of love is irrational the trunk and branches aren't. The root being irrational "Yes" to the question of "To be or not to be?" and branches being answers to question "What should be?". Those answers can, should and in fact to certain degree are rational. Made so by natural selection. DNA and thoughts are not fundamentally different in relation to this issue. You may say that selection of thoughts -intelligence does not happen by natural selection, but criteria of selection of thoughts are actually proxies of natural selection designed by it.
Intelligence is not just ideas but interaction of them, and feelings, tastes and thoughts are all interacting between themselves AND each other in the melting pot of our minds to produce experience and behavior. How well and productively those interaction happens is an issue. For example lack of recognition that "attraction" and "wish" are of same domain and are both equally yours or rather you will prevent them from interacting in proper fashion. Lack of recognition that feelings and attractions have rationality to them will remove the chance of cognitive skills to transmute and direct those not to mention that one will not be aware of the point they have.
And there is possibility of transformation and direction of affects . Even sexuality is not totally hardwired, just think about the range of fetishes and whether they are genetical.=))
More obviously general emotions can be guided by logic.
Love is umbrella term that includes enjoyment and joy. Enjoyment/appreciation is subject to development. Joy is not assigned and can be applied arbitrarily.

@Ryene Astraelis
@truck

[FoxOnStilts]

That's one thing I recall reading about SEI and ILE... somewhere. Basically, it said that ILE often just voices ideas without necessarily meaning to carry them out, and SEI recognizes that fact and doesn't try to help them with every single thing they mention.

Yeah, it's pretty awesome, actually. I wouldn't want help running my ideas or doing a part of it. All I want is moral support/cheerleading/encouragement while I do something. That's the best way anyone can help me implement something.

[Words]

I have no real interest in my duals? Does anybody really like their duals?

The only women I tend to like are very feminine, very sweet girls that are introverted and imaginative. But I go through phases, and I used to like sexually aggressive Se types. I have never really had any interest in Alpha SFs.

Basically, I seem to like delta and beta NFs...



This part of the theory seems to be not working out for me. I really do not even care about the theory of duality. Anybody else disinterested in the dual thing?

You created/advertised iscion.

Come on now eh???????? ???

Trollo lol