Aggressive IEE's

[SyrupDeGem]

Or even assertive....Do they exist? Describe if so.


Taken from the wiki socion re: Se function in an IEE...


"IEEs have the capability and ability to be direct and firm with others in such activities as giving direct commands or making categorical statements about things perceived. However, the period of time when this occurs in an IEE is generally short-lived. As soon as the IEE starts to think about and starts to seriously consider the negative connotations of their directness or firmness ( ), for example, fear of instilling fear in another person in such a way that it would cause the person to be timid to or even scared to approach the IEE thereby distorting the personal bonds the IEE has with the person ( ), the IEE will back away from making such statements. Therefore these direct and categorical statements are quite difficult for an IEE to make, even if the IEE understands the benefits of being direct or firm with others, such as the benefits of being firm or direct with children in parenthood"

EDIT for Park: The above quote is an excerpt of a description of IEE using Se. I am not suggesting this particular excerpt suggests aggression. I am making the jump myself and asking if others have experience of this.

Anyone have experience of this?

My mother is an IEE and she had some moments, she once chased me and hit me, once smacked me...etc. A very old friend of mine from school is an IEE and she has violent tendancies towards men she is in a relationship with. My brother is also IEE and though people have started fights with him in the past he is much more apssive aggressive than aggressive.

So are IEE folk just as prone to losing it as many other types? Maybe we could do a generalised run down list.... ESTp would be top no?

[anndelise]

I think that any type has a certain limit of (whatever) that they can handle before they finally put their foot down. And they would vary at how long they would keep that foot down vs how quickly they might raise it again.

In terms of extroverted F's (the ones more likely to have sudden emotionally related outburst):

I think an XeFi (with Fe demonstrative) is likely to have emotionally related outbursts that quickly die down and then things are back to normal. Though if the external pressure continues it can lead to high stress and a quick cycling back and forth (similar to what you described). I think an SeFi is better capable of holding on to that initial emotion longer than NeFi, and feel less internal chaos over it.

However, if there is no desire for a personal relationship with a person related to (whatever), then Fi creative could be cold and distant, more easily assertive about their value (regarding whatever) and it's line.

I would say that FeXi would likely be next on the list, except with more of a tendency to cling on to the negative emotion. FeNi would be more directed/aggressive about (whatever). FeSi would be more chaotic, saying one thing (about whatever) but their actions and outbursts showing that they are still hanging on to the issue, months or even years later.

[Kim]

"IEEs have the capability and ability to be direct and firm with others in such activities as giving direct commands or making categorical statements about things perceived. However, the period of time when this occurs in an IEE is generally short-lived. As soon as the IEE starts to think about and starts to seriously consider the negative connotations of their directness or firmness ( ), for example, fear of instilling fear in another person in such a way that it would cause the person to be timid to or even scared to approach the IEE thereby distorting the personal bonds the IEE has with the person ( ), the IEE will back away from making such statements. Therefore these direct and categorical statements are quite difficult for an IEE to make, even if the IEE understands the benefits of being direct or firm with others, such as the benefits of being firm or direct with children in parenthood"

I absolutely relate to this, especially when dealing with students and communicating criticism and (sometimes) annoyance (e.g. at work ethics, sloppy work, etc.). I am getting better at it, but I do this exact thing in my thinking, namely that I do not want to alienate them or make them feel bad. So I usually embed negative feedback in something positive.

And I have have been known to lose it on occasion, but only with significant others during fights. Some of these fights were pretty ugly and I seriously flipped out on guys, but it takes a lot for me to get to the point.

[consentingadult]

Or even assertive....Do they exist? Describe if so.

Yes they do. Take, e.g. DJ Arendee, a person who is in total denial about his true type and spends a lot of time trying to make us believe he's a bad ass MF.

Your quote about the IEE's role function can take two forms: a temporary form which acts to counter Se-attacks (thus sets boundaries), and a pathological one, in which case the Role function becomes somewhat sociopathic. I wrote about it in a blog:

http://mavericksocionics.blogspot.nl...ole%20Function

[Kim]

Yes they do. Take, e.g. DJ Arendee, a person who is in total denial about his true type and spends a lot of time trying to make us believe he's a bad ass MF.

DJA is most definitely beta. That much is pretty clear. He does not even remotely look like an IEE...

[Minde]

My IEE sister was a security guard for a few years, first in retail and then at a hospital. While the majority of her work was psychological and communication, she did have to use force occasionally. Especially at the hospital, there'd be people she'd have to wrestle and restrain.

Most of the time she's calm and peaceable; but she can and does lose her temper when strongly provoked or frustrated. Though losing her temper pretty much just consists of raising her voice, crying, and possibly slamming/throwing something.

I would call her more assertive than aggressive. But she definitely has an easier time using force, especially physically, than I do. It's not her first option (that would be talking to someone), but she's not really afraid of it, if it seems necessary.

She has very few enemies, though, and is almost always considerate of others. There's only one person I can think of who has a bad relationship with her (and I suspect he's LSI).

[consentingadult]

DJA is most definitely beta. That much is pretty clear. He does not even remotely look like an IEE...

I totally disagree. He very much looks like an IEE.

[Absurd]

I would say you're pretty aggressive, consentingadult. Stabbing Gilly in the head, tsk-tsk.

[Kill4Me]

I totally disagree. He very much looks like an IEE.

[consentingadult]

They look similar because both are psychopaths, not because they share type.

[Absurd]

Hehehehehehhe.

[UDP]

yes they exist

[Park]

Or even assertive....Do they exist? Describe if so.


Taken from the wiki socion re: Se function in an IEE...


"IEEs have the capability and ability to be direct and firm with others in such activities as giving direct commands or making categorical statements about things perceived. However, the period of time when this occurs in an IEE is generally short-lived. As soon as the IEE starts to think about and starts to seriously consider the negative connotations of their directness or firmness ( ), for example, fear of instilling fear in another person in such a way that it would cause the person to be timid to or even scared to approach the IEE thereby distorting the personal bonds the IEE has with the person ( ), the IEE will back away from making such statements. Therefore these direct and categorical statements are quite difficult for an IEE to make, even if the IEE understands the benefits of being direct or firm with others, such as the benefits of being firm or direct with children in parenthood"



Anyone have experience of this?

My mother is an IEE and she had some moments, she once chased me and hit me, once smacked me...etc. A very old friend of mine from school is an IEE and she has violent tendancies towards men she is in a relationship with. My brother is also IEE and though people have started fights with him in the past he is much more apssive aggressive than aggressive.

So are IEE folk just as prone to losing it as many other types? Maybe we could do a generalised run down list.... ESTp would be top no?

The excerpt you quoted has nothing to do with violence or people losing it. What are you smoking?

[Park]

Therefore these direct and categorical statements are quite difficult for an IEE to make

It shouldn't be so difficult with their duals, presuming I'm a qualified SLI representative. Directness and firmness are desired qualities to have, and can only strengthen my bonds with a person. Indirectness and spinelessness, on the other hand, provide a great opportunity of ruining whatever bonds there already exist.

[anndelise]

It shouldn't be so difficult with their duals, presuming I'm a qualified SLI representative. Directness and firmness are desired qualities to have, and can only strengthen my bonds with a person. Indirectness and spinelessness, on the other hand, provide a great opportunity of ruining whatever bonds there already exist.

Ne is far from direct and firm. It leaves too many windows open to settle on just one. It leads to perceiving even something simple in multitude ways and the Ne person of making things more complex than they needed to be. When perceptions are so mosaic, round-aboutness is the usual route. For NeFi, this is one reason why it helps when their partner expresses a more semi-firm or semi-direct desire (Fi)...even something simple as "yes, I want this to happen" or "no, I don't want that". Because that helps reduce the number of windows/paths available. Without that from their partner, the NeFi is at great risk of overwhelming anxiety trying to sift through all the options.

If you are expecting your dual to consistently be firm and direct, then maybe NeFi isn't your dual? Because that sounds like an aweful lot of pressure to place on Ne base.

Edited to add: oy, and don't even get me started on when circumstances change,

[Park]

I expect my dual to be direct and firm with/toward me when need be, and not feel hesitant for the reasons mentioned in the quoted text. Leaving too many windows open and looking at things from different angles doesn't necessarily imply nor result in indirectness and not being firm, if that's what you're suggesting. Comparing apples and oranges doesn't magically make you an IEE, either.

[anndelise]

I expect my dual to be direct and firm with/toward me when need be, and not feel hesitant for the reasons mentioned in the quoted text.

But even the quoted text said that even if the iee understands the benifits of being firm and direct with others, it's still difficult for them to do.

Leaving too many windows open and looking at things from different angles doesn't necessarily imply nor result in indirectness and not being firm, if that's what you're suggesting.

If the person is looking at something from multiple povs, then they aren't likely to stick with just one of those povs enough to be direct or firm about it. Unless it's something that they very firmly believe in...which for NeFi is more likely to be the value of looking at something from multiple povs.

Also, because NeFi don't tend to have strong categorical ideas, that makes it harder to describe what they are thinking, which naturally leads to round-about descriptions. Add in their tacticalness and there's an additional experimental approach to their methods that are prone to change as circumstances and feedback results alter the initial ideas. Being firm and direct requires choosing ONE out of many.

So you're right in that open windows and different angles doesn't necessarily imply indirectness and not being firm, but it sure makes it difficult and stressful to consistently choose and stick with ONE out of many.

[consentingadult]

I expect my dual to be direct and firm with/toward me when need be, and not feel hesitant for the reasons mentioned in the quoted text. Leaving too many windows open and looking at things from different angles doesn't necessarily imply nor result in indirectness and not being firm, if that's what you're suggesting. Comparing apples and oranges doesn't magically make you an IEE, either.

The deal is quite simple: in a dual relationship, there is no reason for an IEE to hold back what they are thinking about stuff or how they feel about things, they will be quite open and candid. Hence, problems that require them to be firm and direct do not rise easily. Also, IEEs soften SLIs, changing their expectations in the process ;-)

Or did I misunderstand you and you mean you want to be in an BDSM relationship with a dual and them to be on top?

[Park]

But even the quoted text said that even if the iee understands the benifits of being firm and direct with others, it's still difficult for them to do.

The quoted text also explained (in a pretty clear and concise fashion) why it would be difficult for IEEs to be that way, and my point was that those reasons/concerns would only be valid/relevant in relation to a specific socionics demographic, which I would expect to exclude SLIs. Jesus, ann. How more literal do I have to be?

[Park]

The deal is quite simple: in a dual relationship, there is no reason for an IEE to hold back what they are thinking about stuff or how they feel about things, they will be quite open and candid. Hence, problems that require them to be firm and direct do not rise easily. Also, IEEs soften SLIs, changing their expectations in the process ;-)

Or did I misunderstand you and you mean you want to be in an BDSM relationship with a dual and them to be on top?

No, I was just saying I would let a dual fuck me directly and firmly. But you're right, kinda. It's not really about "problems" that require them to be firm and direct, but about not hesitating to be direct and show where exactly they stand out of fear of damaging their relationship with me, as those are things I actually value and appreciate, and not something I'd be repelled by like some other kinds of people might. I'd rather have my personal bonds with someone "distorted" by directness and firmness than by the lack of those things.

[anndelise]

The quoted text also explained (in a pretty clear and concise fashion) why it would be difficult for IEEs to be that way, and my point was that those reasons/concerns would only be valid/relevant in relation to a specific socionics demographic, which I would expect to exclude SLIs. Jesus, ann. How more literal do I have to be?

It's a Role function, not a base, not a creative, a Role function. Which usually gets turned to when under social pressures. SLI wouldn't be applying that pressure, so there would be no need to be firm and direct. With an SLI, supposedly they could relax, be themselves. Part of being able to relax and be one's self (as NeFi) is the ability to talk about their thoughts (which often change) and their feelings (which often change). But you want them to be firm and direct...expecting them to stick with one thought, one emotion...which applies a social pressure to not be themselves.

Ideally the NeFi's dual would play with and be generative with the thoughts the NeFi expresses. And if the NeFi is trying to achieve something, then they could use the help of someone who is more grounded but just as flexible when the NeFi inevitably alters their idea/goal/plan. This is far from asking for firmness from them.

Edited to add: but perhaps you'd just be happier with an Fi subtype than an Ne subtype. As the Fi subtype wouldn't be as changeable/flexible as the Ne one would.


Edited to add: basically you're saying that you want the NeFi to be in Se role mode and not let their -Ne take over again.

[Park]

"Being firm and/or direct" ≠ "sticking with one thought, one emotion." Please read some dictionary definitions before drawing non-existing parallels and clutter your posts with completely irrelevant information. This is getting annoying.

[anndelise]

"Being firm and/or direct" ≠ "sticking with one thought, one emotion." Please read some dictionary definitions before drawing non-existing parallels and clutter your posts with completely irrelevant things. This is getting annoying.

Firm:
adj. firm·er, firm·est
1. Resistant to externally applied pressure.
3. Securely fixed in place
4. Indicating or possessed of determination or resolution
5. Constant; steadfast
6.
a. Not subject to change; fixed and definite
b. Unfluctuating; steady
7. Strong and sure

As in not -Ne.


Direct

1. To manage or conduct the affairs of; regulate.
2. To have or take charge of; control.
3. To give authoritative instructions to
4. To cause to move toward a goal; aim.
5. To show or indicate the way for
6. To cause to move in or follow a straight course

9.
a. To give guidance and instruction to (actors or musicians, for example) in the rehearsal and performance of a work.
b. To supervise the performance of.
v.intr.
1. To give commands or directions.
2. To conduct a performance or rehearsal.
adj.
1. Proceeding without interruption in a straight course or line; not deviating or swerving: a direct route.
2. Straightforward and candid; frank
3. Having no intervening persons, conditions, or agencies

5. Being of unbroken descent; lineal

7. Lacking compromising or mitigating elements;

About the only thing there that could apply to -Ne is giving guidance and instruction. Just don't expect that to be firm, straightforward, lineal, considering no mitigating circumstances, authoritative, nor uninterrupted.

[Park]

Whatever.

"Being firm and/or direct" ≠ "sticking with one thought, one emotion." Please read some dictionary definitions before drawing non-existing parallels and clutter your posts with completely irrelevant information. This is getting annoying.

Which kind of reminds me of what the OP did. She posted an excerpt from a text addressing directness and firmness in behavior, which she automatically equated to hostility, physical aggression, and mental instability. Fucking amazing.

[anndelise]

She posted a text about Se Role (which conflicts with Ne).
You respond by essentially saying you want the Se over the Ne base.

You tell me to look up the definitions of firm and direct, i gave them to you.
If you have different definitions in mind, feel free to post them to help make your point clearer.

[Park]

She posted a text about Se Role (which conflicts with Ne).
You respond by essentially saying you want the Se over the Ne base.

If you want to talk theory, duals are supposed to make each other use their Roles freely and comfortably without feeling guilty about not valuing those IEs.

And OP posted a text addressing specific things the author relates to Se Role, not a text about how Se role conflicts with Ne base. (Though you can probably argue in favor of the implications.) I "essentially" responded by critiquing the inconsistency in her post and sharing my personal experience in relation to the behavior addressed in the excerpt. You're, of course, free to draw your own conclusions and prescribe a different essence (which fits YOUR POV) to anything and everything I say.

You tell me to look up the definitions of firm and direct, i gave them to you.
If you have different definitions in mind, feel free to post them to help make your point clearer.

No, I'm unwilling to. Not now, anyways.

[wacey]

^ The above sort of illustrates the point I want to make. The point is this, IEE are often demanding of their SLI duals.

I have seen it time and again. "I don't want to eat at that place, lets go to this place, they have better appies and I like the waitresses". "She wasn't being nice to you, she was hitting on you cause she is attracted to you". "If you want you could talk to her and that would lead to her feeling such and such way about you". "Haven't you already had enough to drink tonight, don't you want to save room for more later on?" "I'm tired, do we need to be up this early in the morning to have homemade pancakes?" "The cab is here, we could all go together and meet up it will be fun".

Nothing they say seems to be demanding on the surface, yet underneath much of what they say is suggestible. It's a kind of "let's do things my way cause I have thought about all the alternatives and I am a gooood judge of what's good/not good, worthwhile/notworthwhile. I think the SLI is somewhat subject to the IEE desires in the way that the LSE is subject to EII interpersonal demands. You just seriously don't argue with them, if they want to go to this place over that place, and they want us all to go, everyone had better go. It would hella scary to argue with them when they are in Se mode.

I do see them being assertive this way with duals and even activity partners in a way that they are not assertive with others.

The EXCEPTION being when talking in a predetermined social manner, such as when ordering food from a server. "I would have the blah blah blah, with blah blah, and it's possible I have a substitution ceasar for spring salad?" It's a question sure, but one that was rhetorical, of course the IEE is having the substitution. This follows the aristocratic dichotomy.

In a open ended social setting wherein the need to be the acting authority on a topic like that of a technical nature, they seem to doubt themselves. An IEE I know is a chiropractor and she was having a difficult time in the beginning about speaking with her clients and having the professional "authority" to come across as though she really does know what she is doing. An LSE helped her out in this regard, by counseling her to trust herself and to speak with authority and assertiveness, "you know what you are talking about, you have been trained with horse chiropractics for two years, don't doubt yourself, people will notice if you doubt yourself". By the time I met this women, she was very assertive and yet very personable at the same time. You guys ever met people like that?

In the realm of proper form, for example if you need advice on what to do about your relationships, or how you should treat your boss at work, or what's a fair way of dealing with this and that problem, I think the IEE is more adept at discussing topics like this. Sorry, don't mean to pigeon hole you guys. I think that IEE are very assertive when they come into their own.

[Absurd]

[Kim]

In a open ended social setting wherein the need to be the acting authority on a topic like that of a technical nature, they seem to doubt themselves. An IEE I know is a chiropractor and she was having a difficult time in the beginning about speaking with her clients and having the professional "authority" to come across as though she really does know what she is doing. An LSE helped her out in this regard, by counseling her to trust herself and to speak with authority and assertiveness, "you know what you are talking about, you have been trained with horse chiropractics for two years, don't doubt yourself, people will notice if you doubt yourself". By the time I met this women, she was very assertive and yet very personable at the same time. You guys ever met people like that?

I think students and colleagues would describe me like this nowadays, but would not have when I started out, so this makes sense to me.

[anndelise]

I think students and colleagues would describe me like this nowadays, but would not have when I started out, so this makes sense to me.

I'm still working on developing my own assertiveness. My daughter and this forum helped, lol.

[Kim]

I'm still working on developing my own assertiveness. My daughter and this forum helped, lol.

It is still something I have to actively make myself do and which does not feel good (for example during a meeting with a student when it comes to enforcing guidelines, etc.) or something that just happens in the spur of the moment without much control (like in a recent meeting during which I started to bitch about arbitrary rules put forth by the administration). It is much easier when something is at stake though. It is an ongoing affair.

[Absurd]

≠

[anndelise]

It is still something I have to actively make myself do and which does not feel good (for example during a meeting with a student when it comes to enforcing guidelines, etc.) or something that just happens in the spur of the moment without much control (like in a recent meeting during which I started to bitch about arbitrary rules put forth by the administration). It is much easier when something is at stake though. It is an ongoing affair.

When I helped teach my peers (fellow class members) I couldn't enforce anything even though I had authority to do so. I preferred to approach them as one of them, though there were a couple of guys who would make things difficult for me, and I didn't know how to handle that. My instructors kept trying to help me be more firm about rules and interactions, but it was frustrating for all of us, heh.

When I helped my mother teach boy scout badge courses, it was a bit easier, but I still preferred working with them rather than "over" them.

And when I was a manager at the sorting station for the newspaper, the manager was leaving and was trying to convince me to take his place. But I didn't want that kind of authority, I preferred working the sorting machine with the other workers. If I had taken that position I would have been isolated and alone and "the bitch boss", none of which I wanted.

Hell, lol...when mcnew had me as a moderator I couldn't handle making the moderating decisions back then, either. Talk about a ball of anxiety! I quit after what, two weeks?

Offering ideas or alternative ways to view is one thing, making the decisions and enforcing them is a whole other ball game, heh.

[SyrupDeGem]

I expect my dual to be direct and firm with/toward me when need be, and not feel hesitant for the reasons mentioned in the quoted text. Leaving too many windows open and looking at things from different angles doesn't necessarily imply nor result in indirectness and not being firm, if that's what you're suggesting. Comparing apples and oranges doesn't magically make you an IEE, either.

Idk park, that sounds like hella expectation to have from the get go, that would most likely frighten me away... though prehaps there is a dance before this assumed directness in which both parties 'dualise'?

Also, why so angry?

[mikemex]

Here is where you begin to spot the limits of Socionics. I find the NPA theory far more helpful here. Anyone can engage in aggressive behavior but Aggression, as a trait, is hierarchical thinking in terms of control and submission. I think Ne types find such way of thinking totally foreign. Si types, having strong Se, are more prone to it but it's still unnatural to them. Se types do it naturally so don't give it much importance. Ni types are the machiaviallians I think.

In the particular case of the IEE, the quiet variant is usually narcissist-perfectionist and the loud is usually purely narcissist. Neither is aggressive but the NP IEEs are more self-confident and thus, less likely to lose control and engage in aggressive behavior. As an NP IEE myself, I know that I have no problem using violence and aggression if I have to, but at the same time, I never find it enough justification for it.

[applejacks]

Or even assertive....Do they exist? Describe if so.


Taken from the wiki socion re: Se function in an IEE...


"IEEs have the capability and ability to be direct and firm with others in such activities as giving direct commands or making categorical statements about things perceived. However, the period of time when this occurs in an IEE is generally short-lived. As soon as the IEE starts to think about and starts to seriously consider the negative connotations of their directness or firmness ( ), for example, fear of instilling fear in another person in such a way that it would cause the person to be timid to or even scared to approach the IEE thereby distorting the personal bonds the IEE has with the person ( ), the IEE will back away from making such statements. Therefore these direct and categorical statements are quite difficult for an IEE to make, even if the IEE understands the benefits of being direct or firm with others, such as the benefits of being firm or direct with children in parenthood"



Anyone have experience of this?

My mother is an IEE and she had some moments, she once chased me and hit me, once smacked me...etc. A very old friend of mine from school is an IEE and she has violent tendancies towards men she is in a relationship with. My brother is also IEE and though people have started fights with him in the past he is much more apssive aggressive than aggressive.

So are IEE folk just as prone to losing it as many other types? Maybe we could do a generalised run down list.... ESTp would be top no?

I think short-lived is the key word, and I think @consentingadult had a good point with the pathological form.

From personal experience, if I'm upset or pressed to get my point across, it's almost as if I understand that controlling my response will provide the outcome I desire. Meaning, in a heated moment, my focus was first on the end result I desired from the other individual, and then I can harness my action or reaction accordingly.
@Kim had a similar point when she said negative feedback is often wrapped in a positive statement. If I wanted to criticize someone, I'll think first about what approach would have the most effect on that individual before responding.

Like many things, it may just depend on the other individual and the situation. More often than not, however, I choose a psychological approach than a physical.

That being said, I can think of one scenario when I was livid and ready to rise to action. A guy at a bar slapped my friend's ass once, and I went from 0 to 100 in the blink of an eye, and quite honestly transformed myself as I approached him with a threat. In my mind, the outcome was "scare this douchebag and do it so he knows you arent kidding around", and then I was able to allow myself the aggression. But a few minutes later I was laughing and carrying on.


So bottom line, I really do think our actions are centered on the end result first, followed by the most effective path.

[Park]

Idk park, that sounds like hella expectation to have from the get go, that would most likely frighten me away... though prehaps there is a dance before this assumed directness in which both parties 'dualise'?

Normally, I would ask what sounded like a hell lot of expectations to have, but I have the feeling you'll respond to everything but my question. And that's exactly the type of answers I try to avoid wasting my time and nerves for.

Also, why so angry?

I was more antsy than angry, for personal reasons. But I'd rather be angry than stupid, i.e., incapable of telling the difference between the myriad of unrelated shit you put together in one basket.

[Kim]

This thread is about IEEs, so it needs some totally unrelated, non-sensical, Ne-induced sloth amazingness...Love it or gtfo:

[Park]

I better not say anything mean to a moderator. I might get my ass kicked, non-aggressively, thread-split IEE style.

[Kim]

I better not say anything mean to a moderator. I might get my ass kicked, non-aggressively, thread-split IEE style.

I prefer overt meanness to vague *pathetic loser* comments or puke smileys. And the thread split was in reference to you bringing bullshit into what was meant to be a celebration (because, you know, some of us do not have a family nearby to celebrate a birthday with and might appreciate some extra niceness), not a response to you hurting my precious little feelings with meanness. Get it? Is that direct and firm enough for you?