Relations of benefit differ so much depending on type?

[Encrustacean]

This post has been removed.

[Myst]

Not sure anymore if I have benefit relations, I think it's actually semidual so sorry can't share experiences on that. My brother is still LIE but that's not a romantic relationship obviously I think I've known a few ESEs very superficially and they are funny but are also just annoying a lot of the time really... LIE seems much more interesting than ESE overall.

[nefnaf]

Just a small correction -- cognitive styles always correspond to duality in benefit relations. This is because benefit rings are aligned to either process or result, as with supervision rings.

It is true that erotic attitudes, i.e. Judicious/Decisive trait will match in benefit relations with a rational benefactor, although it's not clear how much more important that is for romance than Merry/Serious trait. I've never personally dated an SLI so I can't comment from experience on which "direction" is preferable.

[Pookie]

Judicious / decisive - "youre going about this the wrong way"
Merry / serious - "I cant believe you came to that conclusion"

As an introverted irrational, here'smy generalization. J.D. match is better long term stability, M.S. is better for getiing attracted. Pick and choose.

[willekeurig]

From my past experiencs I'd say I prefer SEIs over ILIs for all types of relationships

[bolong]

I think EIEs prefer SEIs for spouses. Especially for completely non-dualized EIEs, who might find LSIs too hard and different. SEIs are so soft that it's almost like the EIE is not even being supervised.

With EIE-SEE the SEE will sooner or later peace out. For SEE it's a matter of recognizing the imbalance and becoming aware that being a beneficiary all the time is limiting their freedom. But once they're aware it's not hard to force their way out of the Fe cocoon with Se. (I hope that didn't come off as overly simple).

Interestingly I know a lot of EIE girls who are attracted to ILE males, but they never work out well. I'm generalizing a little shamelessly here but EIE cannot really keep ILE interested, unless ILE is a social climber and the EIE is a promising source of status. And if a Ti-creative is not that into you but stays with you, they are totally using you. In fact even a Ti-creative who is totally into you will try to use you.

[mu4]

I think EIEs prefer SEIs for spouses. Especially for completely non-dualized EIEs, who might find LSIs too hard and different. SEIs are so soft that it's almost like the EIE is not even being supervised.

With EIE-SEE the SEE will sooner or later peace out. For SEE it's a matter of recognizing the imbalance and becoming aware that being a beneficiary all the time is limiting their freedom. But once they're aware it's not hard to force their way out of the Fe cocoon with Se. (I hope that didn't come off as overly simple).

Interestingly I know a lot of EIE girls who are attracted to ILE males, but they never work out well. I'm generalizing a little shamelessly here but EIE cannot really keep ILE interested, unless ILE is a social climber and the EIE is a promising source of status. And if a Ti-creative is not that into you but stays with you, they are totally using you. In fact even a Ti-creative who is totally into you will try to use you.

I find age/levels of development has a lot to do with quality of benefit relations, with benefactor being necessarily more independent. Benefactor can give duality functions thru contact functions and beneficiary can only deploy dual functions inertly, one being POLR, benefactor has to give beneficiary distance and fulfill their requests while beneficiary cannot provide 100% return investment. This is the asymmetry of the relationship. This asymmetry is however a very powerful force and the bonding of the individuals is dependent on a lot of other factors.

Basically from what I've read, benefactor must give distance and accept limited satisfaction in the relationship for it to work. Beneficiary need to resist the urge to usurp control. FWIW extroverted benefit relations seems more explosive and volatile.

From my experience what you say about ILE males is true to a certain extent, but it's often the EIE that's a social climber and the ILE that is socially engaged. I think the idea of using people is fairly trivial, everyone more or less use each other at some level. Also from my observation, although in many ways romance styles make relationships easier to engage from the decisive/judicious dichotomy. Merry/Serious dichotomy is the source of emotional communication and emotional connection which becomes more important for long term relations and friendship.

[bolong]

I find age/levels of development has a lot to do with quality of benefit relations, with benefactor being necessarily more independent. Benefactor can give duality functions thru contact functions and beneficiary can only deploy dual functions inertly, one being POLR, benefactor has to give beneficiary distance and fulfill their requests while beneficiary cannot provide 100% return investment. This is the asymmetry of the relationship. This asymmetry is however a very powerful force and the bonding of the individuals is dependent on a lot of other factors.

Basically from what I've read, benefactor must give distance and accept limited satisfaction in the relationship for it to work. Beneficiary need to resist the urge to usurp control. FWIW extroverted benefit relations seems more explosive and volatile.

From my experience what you say about ILE males is true to a certain extent, but it's often the EIE that's a social climber and the ILE that is socially engaged. I think the idea of using people is fairly trivial, everyone more or less use each other at some level. Also from my observation, although in many ways romance styles make relationships easier to engage from the decisive/judicious dichotomy. Merry/Serious dichotomy is the source of emotional communication and emotional connection which becomes more important for long term relations and friendship.

I knew this would come up, Ti-creative justifying its actions LOL

My response was ready too: 1) Even if everyone uses everyone, Ti-creative is less adept at making the person being used feel better, which makes what they did worse. At least for the poor used person.

2) There are, in fact, some people who do NOT use others at all, or at least try very hard not to, and repent it for a long time if it happened. And if you want to narrow it down to type, these are the IXFx, because it is more difficult for us to pretend we like someone we don't like than it is to stay with that person and try to extract some benefits (this applies to platonic relationships too).

[bolong]

This is good stuff - I'll keep it in mind before I make a mistake, lol

I'd be interested to hear more about intertype relations from you, you seem to have some experience in this area..

Are you EIE??

[mu4]

I knew this would come up, Ti-creative justifying its actions LOL

My response was ready too: 1) Even if everyone uses everyone, Ti-creative is less adept at making the person being used feel better, which makes what they did worse. At least for the poor used person.

2) There are, in fact, some people who do NOT use others at all, or at least try very hard not to, and repent it for a long time if it happened. And if you want to narrow it down to type, these are the IXFx, because it is more difficult for us to pretend we like someone we don't like than it is to stay with that person and try to extract some benefits.

IMO Ti creatives don't really care to make people feel better or particularly work at the whole Fi thing. It's sort of their way of dealing with people, they want to be recognized for other stuff not a popularity contest.

IXFx are quite adept at using people, their duals are all extx types who are adept at business type relationships. They can't quite handle the give and take that reality presents, so they let someone else act as a agent for them in these matters. This especially goes for Ti creatives who are willing to get their hands dirty for their few friends and partners in whatever manner of questionable actions reality might require of them. Ti creative are basically attractive to various other individuals for this particular trait of theirs.

Also a curious thing about super-ego is that XLE's are like some of the most generous types in the socion, often frivolous with their spending on loved ones and gifting extravagantly. A individual isn't just the ego, they're also the super-ego, id, super-id. At a certain level the IXFx type are the most relationship using types and often extremely demanding in a close relationship of their partner/children/etc. All functions get manifested in close relations, not merely ego.

Socionics isn't ego, that's just the label.

[Emmym]

I have to sort of agree with the ILE here, as much as I hate to say it, haha. All types use people. I would even say IXFx types use people more than most, we're just more stealthy about it, with EXFx types seeming the least stealthy about it IMO. I would even arguably say that ILEs are more harmless because they're generally pretty transparent, though not as much as SLEs. And the reactions ILEs have when you cut them off is nothing compared to the melodrama and guilt tripping IEIs and EIIs will pull out of their arsenal.

[bolong]

At a certain level the IXFx type are the most relationship using types and often extremely demanding in a close relationship of their partner/children/etc.

I agree with this but

I would even say IXFx types use people more than most, we're just more stealthy about it

this is oversimplifying. I can make someone miserable if I have the power to affect them, and I've been hurt by them. But I'm really bad at using people. So is EII.

[Beautiful sky]

I don't use people. It's immoral, sometimes can be unethical, it's rude and just stupid thing to do. Tell me how it helps cultivate and nurture relations?

[Eliza Thomason]

This is an interesting theory that you put good thought to, Spider, and probably there is something to it. Since my exhusband was ESE, it matches. Benefactor can never really appreciate his Benefactee, so in the long run this is not good for Benefactee. I have heard it said that Benefit always ends with the Benefactor leaving for someone else. So Benefactees beware. But being romantically matched did work for a good start. I was glad I did not have anything to be bitter or messed up about in that department. Being an erotic mismatch could leave one questioning oneself after a time. Two obstinate types means someone always has to give in (that would have been me). It was very invalidating. But we had other problems that made it impossible. I was serious and he merry and he definitely thought I was too serious. He always thought I should be more involved in our church (committees, group activities) and that that was a failing of mine, and I thought I was involved enough (Fe/Fi).

[mu4]

This is an interesting theory that you put good thought to, Spider, and probably there is something to it. Since my exhusband was ESE, it matches. Benefactor can never really appreciate his Benefactee, so in the long run this is not good for Benefactee. I have heard it said that Benefit always ends with the Benefactor leaving for someone else. So Benefactees beware. But being romantically matched did work for a good start. I was glad I did not have anything to be bitter or messed up about in that department. Being an erotic mismatch could leave one questioning oneself after a time. Two obstinate types means someone always has to give in (that would have been me). It was very invalidating. But we had other problems that made it impossible. I was serious and he merry and he definitely thought I was too serious. He always thought I should be more involved in our church (committees, group activities) and that that was a failing of mine, and I thought I was involved enough (Fe/Fi).

Benefit relations have a certain quality to them that's hard to avoid and it's probably one of the top 3 relations by my assessment over all. However it's not one that leaves a lot of independence for the Benefactee and it can leave the Benefactor wanting.

Ted Turner + Jane Fonda is the most famous and familiar of the Benefit relations I've witnessed. ILE(Ted) - EIE(Jane) is fairly familiar to me as a Atlanta resident.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-daughter.html
http://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-...sband-20122010
http://www.nydailynews.com/entertain...ticle-1.334721
http://www.oprah.com/oprahshow/Janes...-Divorce-Video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcTK804tGS0

It's a interesting relationship, certainly important but probably something that defined those 10 years they were together and perhaps even the rest after. This was always a strange relationship but in hindsight of analysis, it is a rather obvious one.

Also as a side note, Ted also happens to be in a supervision friendship with one of his oldest and best friends Jimmy Carter (EII). Another strange who would have thought it would happen friendships that makes perfect sense.