LSE and SEE benefit relations (ESTj and ESFp)

[Beautiful sky]

Please offer your experience, story, etc

[aixelsyd]

fwiw, I self-type as SEE (and have since late 2010):

With LSE-Te father:

He's got his share of problems. We actually do get along alright these days, but growing up, it was a highly unpleasant relationship. I used to get incredibly pissed at his out of control emotions and double standards (he'll do the things he criticizes others for, be hypercritical about other people but refuse to address his own weaknesses). He resented me for my unstructured behavior, hammered common sense into me and would drill me with math questions because I was horrible at it. It was a mutually psychologically abusive relationship growing up. I appreciate the things he's done for me, however (taught me a lot about day to day practical matters. I value being frugal and having common sense, am cautious, exercise restraint and judgment, sensitive to bull shit). We don't praise each other, however. It's more of a business relationship than a father - daughter relationship. Emotionally, it's frigid - no warmth or affection which died at about 4 or 5 years after I was born. I've always felt I amounted to nothing in his eyes because he's basically told me, over and over, that I will never amount to anything.

Te-LSE manager:

[This is a rather positive relationship. We mutually rely on and appreciate each other. I openly appreciate her knowledge and professionalism. She's rather warm, as a person, but some find her cold and over-bearing. I feel strong loyalty toward her and she has been somewhat protective of me. It's best as it is: a professional relationship but one that cares for the other as a human being and not just as a supervisor or employee.

Te-LSE RDC:

His first words to me were that I was pissing him off. He promptly singled me out and made me do push ups and other exercises as punishment. His main issue with me was my utter lack of self-confidence which led to failure. He ripped me a new one several times for quitting on myself. He was protective of me and cared a lot about me, though. I felt like he was a father figure, somewhat, and cared about his opinion a great deal, even came to admire him. He had a way of getting under my skin the way my father does, but I felt he took a greater personal interest in me as a human being than my father ever did. Even though he was an instructor and was supposed to represent the enemy, I liked it when he was around, even when he was insulting us and putting us on our faces. That man really cared and was/is a true professional.

LSE (sub?) acquaintance:

We hit it off pretty well, but I've always felt he is patronizing. He likes to give me advice and acts like he knows better. Almost possessive, but not really. Used to hang out at his shop but stopped because of the early demands of [then] new job. He took it sort of personally. There was a romantic attraction on his side, which amplified that, I feel. But I always viewed him as a responsible, trustworthy person in the sense he wasn't a user (and ragged on the users and leeches we both knew too well in our shared social circle). He viewed me as a genuinely good person, kind, caring, but overly accommodating, loyal to a fault, and tried to make me less so. Has said I think too much and hang onto the past, too much. Never could truly accept that I was a lesbian (instead being bisexual - which could be true, but I felt it wasn't him to say I was, especially when I expressed no interest in men around him). I partially decided to put distance between us because I felt I couldn't let loose and show my true self to him (him being a highly critical person and making fun of people behind their backs, and felt he lacked sympathy and empathy for most people). I'm generally, with good friends, open, outgoing, and affectionate, expressive, and fun loving, silly, and flirty, but I felt like I had to be this serious, controlled person with him at all times. That's okay when I'm working, but with friends, it's stifling.

[Beautiful sky]

fwiw, I self-type as SEE (and have since late 2010):

With LSE-Te father:

He's got his share of problems. We actually do get along alright these days, but growing up, it was a highly unpleasant relationship. I used to get incredibly pissed at his out of control emotions and double standards (he'll do the things he criticizes others for, be hypercritical about other people but refuse to address his own weaknesses). He resented me for my unstructured behavior, hammered common sense into me and would drill me with math questions because I was horrible at it. It was a mutually psychologically abusive relationship growing up. I appreciate the things he's done for me, however (taught me a lot about day to day practical matters. I value being frugal and having common sense, am cautious, exercise restraint and judgment, sensitive to bull shit). We don't praise each other, however. It's more of a business relationship than a father - daughter relationship. Emotionally, it's frigid - no warmth or affection which died at about 4 or 5 years after I was born. I've always felt I amounted to nothing in his eyes because he's basically told me, over and over, that I will never amount to anything.

Te-LSE manager:

[This is a rather positive relationship. We mutually rely on and appreciate each other. I openly appreciate her knowledge and professionalism. She's rather warm, as a person, but some find her cold and over-bearing. I feel strong loyalty toward her and she has been somewhat protective of me. It's best as it is: a professional relationship but one that cares for the other as a human being and not just as a supervisor or employee.

Te-LSE RDC:

His first words to me were that I was pissing him off. He promptly singled me out and made me do push ups and other exercises as punishment. His main issue with me was my utter lack of self-confidence which led to failure. He ripped me a new one several times for quitting on myself. He was protective of me and cared a lot about me, though. I felt like he was a father figure, somewhat, and cared about his opinion a great deal, even came to admire him. He had a way of getting under my skin the way my father does, but I felt he took a greater personal interest in me as a human being than my father ever did. Even though he was an instructor and was supposed to represent the enemy, I liked it when he was around, even when he was insulting us and putting us on our faces. That man really cared and was/is a true professional.

LSE (sub?) acquaintance:

We hit it off pretty well, but I've always felt he is patronizing. He likes to give me advice and acts like he knows better. Almost possessive, but not really. Used to hang out at his shop but stopped because of the early demands of [then] new job. He took it sort of personally. There was a romantic attraction on his side, which amplified that, I feel. But I always viewed him as a responsible, trustworthy person in the sense he wasn't a user (and ragged on the users and leeches we both knew too well in our shared social circle). He viewed me as a genuinely good person, kind, caring, but overly accommodating, loyal to a fault, and tried to make me less so. Has said I think too much and hang onto the past, too much. Never could truly accept that I was a lesbian (instead being bisexual - which could be true, but I felt it wasn't him to say I was, especially when I expressed no interest in men around him). I partially decided to put distance between us because I felt I couldn't let loose and show my true self to him (him being a highly critical person and making fun of people behind their backs, and felt he lacked sympathy and empathy for most people). I'm generally, with good friends, open, outgoing, and affectionate, expressive, and fun loving, silly, and flirty, but I felt like I had to be this serious, controlled person with him at all times. That's okay when I'm working, but with friends, it's stifling.

Thank you

[Beautiful sky]

fwiw, I self-type as SEE (and have since late 2010):

With LSE-Te father:

He's got his share of problems. We actually do get along alright these days, but growing up, it was a highly unpleasant relationship. I used to get incredibly pissed at his out of control emotions and double standards (he'll do the things he criticizes others for, be hypercritical about other people but refuse to address his own weaknesses). He resented me for my unstructured behavior, hammered common sense into me and would drill me with math questions because I was horrible at it. It was a mutually psychologically abusive relationship growing up. I appreciate the things he's done for me, however (taught me a lot about day to day practical matters. I value being frugal and having common sense, am cautious, exercise restraint and judgment, sensitive to bull shit). We don't praise each other, however. It's more of a business relationship than a father - daughter relationship. Emotionally, it's frigid - no warmth or affection which died at about 4 or 5 years after I was born. I've always felt I amounted to nothing in his eyes because he's basically told me, over and over, that I will never amount to anything.

Te-LSE manager:

[This is a rather positive relationship. We mutually rely on and appreciate each other. I openly appreciate her knowledge and professionalism. She's rather warm, as a person, but some find her cold and over-bearing. I feel strong loyalty toward her and she has been somewhat protective of me. It's best as it is: a professional relationship but one that cares for the other as a human being and not just as a supervisor or employee.

Te-LSE RDC:

His first words to me were that I was pissing him off. He promptly singled me out and made me do push ups and other exercises as punishment. His main issue with me was my utter lack of self-confidence which led to failure. He ripped me a new one several times for quitting on myself. He was protective of me and cared a lot about me, though. I felt like he was a father figure, somewhat, and cared about his opinion a great deal, even came to admire him. He had a way of getting under my skin the way my father does, but I felt he took a greater personal interest in me as a human being than my father ever did. Even though he was an instructor and was supposed to represent the enemy, I liked it when he was around, even when he was insulting us and putting us on our faces. That man really cared and was/is a true professional.

LSE (sub?) acquaintance:

We hit it off pretty well, but I've always felt he is patronizing. He likes to give me advice and acts like he knows better. Almost possessive, but not really. Used to hang out at his shop but stopped because of the early demands of [then] new job. He took it sort of personally. There was a romantic attraction on his side, which amplified that, I feel. But I always viewed him as a responsible, trustworthy person in the sense he wasn't a user (and ragged on the users and leeches we both knew too well in our shared social circle). He viewed me as a genuinely good person, kind, caring, but overly accommodating, loyal to a fault, and tried to make me less so. Has said I think too much and hang onto the past, too much. Never could truly accept that I was a lesbian (instead being bisexual - which could be true, but I felt it wasn't him to say I was, especially when I expressed no interest in men around him). I partially decided to put distance between us because I felt I couldn't let loose and show my true self to him (him being a highly critical person and making fun of people behind their backs, and felt he lacked sympathy and empathy for most people). I'm generally, with good friends, open, outgoing, and affectionate, expressive, and fun loving, silly, and flirty, but I felt like I had to be this serious, controlled person with him at all times. That's okay when I'm working, but with friends, it's stifling.

Please help me with something. So I know this one SEE who tried hard and captured an LSE mainly by following him around and flirting with him. Him being sex deprived as he often said he was really fell for her. I don't know if it was because of her manners although I don't think it was because she used to talk about sexual stuff out loud and after some interaction with him she used to watch herself and turn around to make sure he wasn't listening. All her sexual teasing was to appeal to him and everything else she did. I'm just waiting for her to play out of pleasing mode and be herself, that uneasy control self so that their relationship can play out the normal course although i suspect they'll get home wreckers to each other and end up together as she's well on her way to a divorce. When does an SEE relaize the ridiculousness of the nature of their hyper conformity?

[aixelsyd]

Hard to say, Maritsa. Depends how daft the SEE is. Not all SEEs are bestowed with the common sense and self-restraint I possess, but when the relationship and shit starts crumbling around, the charade is no longer fun and most will bail by that point. Sounds like she's drunk on the seduction game, right now, and he's an accomplice, too, by giving in to desire and throwing reason out the window. By their methods, it sounds like it's something not built to last: a love affair. Sorry to hear about it, though.

[Beautiful sky]

Hard to say, Maritsa. Depends how daft the SEE is. Not all SEEs are bestowed with the common sense and self-restraint I possess, but when the relationship and shit starts crumbling around, the charade is no longer fun and most will bail by that point. Sounds like she's drunk on the seduction game, right now, and he's an accomplice, too, by giving in to desire and throwing reason out the window. By their methods, it sounds like it's something not built to last: a love affair. Sorry to hear about it, though.

With SEE being emotionally expressive and vibrant and LSE having out of control emotions how are they together emotionally frigid? What happens in the exchange? Does the SEE simply back out emotionaly while LSE over reacts or the other way around?

[Beautiful sky]

Would someone please explain why SEE tries to distance themselves from LSE?

[Eliza Thomason]

Would someone please explain why SEE tries to distance themselves from LSE?

I just have some thoughts, but first, I am curious about what became of the SEE/LSE relations you described in this thread! Tell us!

Mom's old caregiver, for when I went to work, back where we lived before, was a SEE. She was totally reliable about showing up on time, and when she said she could be there. I really appreciated that. My LSE brother is in charge of Mom's finances, so he paid the SEE for that and when I was at work or away (usually here visiting my to-be husband when my son was away with his Dad). There were SEE-mysteries about her that I didn't understand and made me nervous. But later I understood the ways of SEE and those things didn't bother me then because I could understand where they were coming from.

SEE was a bit flirtatious with my LSE brother (she was single and knew he was an that may have had something to do with it). He asked her to come work at his house, painting since he was moving and she did. He said she worked hard but was frustrated with her resisting his exacting instructions (he is pretty precise about how one paints so I sympathize). Then we had this thing where I had paid her extra for some cleaning when I was gone, and I suggested if she wanted, vacuuming the screens, not imagining that she would have taken them off to do it, and apparently she jammed them back in, and they were not designed for jamming. Half of them were broken and useless. For these specialized-sized screens it cost aobut $70 each to replace, and there a lot, and I was in SHOCK over it. And discouraged. She denied it! And I pressed it, because I did not appreciate the denial. For me it was the principle. I would not have held her to paying for them since I know her income is tight, but I was not willing to pretend with her she had nothing to do with it. But I had to just let it go. Much later it became clear to me that my questioning her threatened her position as an able-caregiver/home-care person and she just couldn't take it.

At any rate, my LSE brother had questioned her on this too, and she got to avoiding him. LSE's tend to correct, and they tend to correct anyone they consider under their jurisdiction (which I suffered, too, which made me indignant with him and pretty mad, because he had no idea how hard it was taking care of Mom - he figured his job was to point out any area at all I might be lax in... like, my housekeeping in the middle of winter when I was trying to put away Christmas, subbing every day because it was flu season, taking Mom to appointments and taking care of all her needs, and out to wrestling meets and tournaments that could be many many hours long and a long winter's drive away... yes, so I did not take kindly to the criticism). But that's how LSE's are. They feel its their job to let everyone know where they could improve in how they do things. And SEE didn't like being told she lacked in this or that area of her work, either.

So that was a case of SEE avoiding LSE. Maybe that's helpful.

[Beautiful sky]

I just have some thoughts, but first, I am curious about what became of the SEE/LSE relations you described in this thread! Tell us!

Mom's old caregiver, for when I went to work, back where we lived before, was a SEE. She was totally reliable about showing up on time, and when she said she could be there. I really appreciated that. My LSE brother is in charge of Mom's finances, so he paid the SEE for that and when I was at work or away (usually here visiting my to-be husband when my son was away with his Dad). There were SEE-mysteries about her that I didn't understand and made me nervous. But later I understood the ways of SEE and those things didn't bother me then because I could understand where they were coming from.

SEE was a bit flirtatious with my LSE brother (she was single and knew he was an that may have had something to do with it). He asked her to come work at his house, painting since he was moving and she did. He said she worked hard but was frustrated with her resisting his exacting instructions (he is pretty precise about how one paints so I sympathize). Then we had this thing where I had paid her extra for some cleaning when I was gone, and I suggested if she wanted, vacuuming the screens, not imagining that she would have taken them off to do it, and apparently she jammed them back in, and they were not designed for jamming. Half of them were broken and useless. For these specialized-sized screens it cost aobut $70 each to replace, and there a lot, and I was in SHOCK over it. And discouraged. She denied it! And I pressed it, because I did not appreciate the denial. For me it was the principle. I would not have held her to paying for them since I know her income is tight, but I was not willing to pretend with her she had nothing to do with it. But I had to just let it go. Much later it became clear to me that my questioning her threatened her position as an able-caregiver/home-care person and she just couldn't take it.

At any rate, my LSE brother had questioned her on this too, and she got to avoiding him. LSE's tend to correct, and they tend to correct anyone they consider under their jurisdiction (which I suffered, too, which made me indignant with him and pretty mad, because he had no idea how hard it was taking care of Mom - he figured his job was to point out any area at all I might be lax in... like, my housekeeping in the middle of winter when I was trying to put away Christmas, subbing every day because it was flu season, taking Mom to appointments and taking care of all her needs, and out to wrestling meets and tournaments that could be many many hours long and a long winter's drive away... yes, so I did not take kindly to the criticism). But that's how LSE's are. They feel its their job to let everyone know where they could improve in how they do things. And SEE didn't like being told she lacked in this or that area of her work, either.

So that was a case of SEE avoiding LSE. Maybe that's helpful.

I like precise instructions and it like my grandmother. Yes that would make sense. LSE can take the fun out of things by wanting things a certain way and honesty is favored by them. I can empathize with why she lied. She didn't want it to be made a big deal. She probably didn't mean to do it purposely and thus broke it. She was just not a patient and careful worker because it was not fun or interesting. In any case when an LSE gets on your case with questioning it is best to be honest and give it to them straight.

[Beautiful sky]

This is the conversation of LSE and SEE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMp4...cf7z6g&index=8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qc9w...=RD1MP8Hcf7z6g

"Women need to realize their bf's weaknesses" SEE

[Beautiful sky]

LSE and SEE conflict here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3NH0...5pDUlZqbWPgmuw

[flames]

My sister is LSE. I like her, but most of the time she's, like, closed-off. All business and I don't like her until I get her personal side. And that's not hard for me but I'm not interested enough to most of the time.

[Soupman]

LSE and SEE conflict here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3NH0...5pDUlZqbWPgmuw

Whose whom there?

Blonde SEE
Brunette LSE

[Beautiful sky]

Whose whom there?

Blonde SEE
Brunette LSE

Aggressive opinionated who is all about research and not tried and true methods blond is SEE

[ClownsandEntropy]

LSE and SEE conflict here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3NH0...5pDUlZqbWPgmuw

Holy moly! Why would you put these two people in a room?? On TV, and with that intro, so they have a reputation and ego to protect?? The entire video made me nervous. And I'm just sitting here at my laptop!

[Beautiful sky]

Holy moly! Why would you put these two people in a room?? On TV, and with that intro, so they have a reputation and ego to protect?? The entire video made me nervous. And I'm just sitting here at my laptop!

Lol

What do you think about each of their approach on the topic?

[Aylen]

I think drugging your children like that sets them up for a future of drug abuse. It is not sensible. It is changing their brain chemistry. Those things are not safe. I became dependent on antihistamines. I am kind of disgusted with the brunette and only watched a couple minutes.

I didn't even watch the blonde. I had to turn it off because of the brunette.

Edit: Turned it back on. lol This woman has no common sense guys. Like they said if the child had a reaction at 37,000 feet what do you do? I have had allergic reactions to benadryl. I wouldn't have got all emotional like the blonde who is also starting to irritate me the way she is raising her voice.

My advice, don't travel long distances with small children. You choose to become a parent so you have to give up some things.

[Beautiful sky]

LSE is being logical, considerate, practical and matter of fact. LSE is giving practical and logical considerations to the conditions faced in long distance flight. Also, giving consideration to other passengers, and on top of this, giving consideration to her child because it is not pleasant for the child to be stuck onboard a restrictive area for hours on end. Also, there is no harm being done to the child because from a health perspective it is safe, infact beneficial given the psychological suffering inflicted on the child. Also after the flight if the child and parent is tired from the exhausting stress the flight imposes then there is less time to enjoy the vacation/destination once arrived, and such things have been done before with the reality that children are not really made out of porcelain and designed by nature to not be that fragile, but not designed by nature to be restricted for several hours.

Despite being clear with common sense and practicality, this sort of thing can leave the LSE open to irrational emotional attacks. The blond woman does not want to listen or to approach things clearly and level headedly, and might have other frustrations in her life where she is using the airplane story as an excuse to attack rather than address her other frustrations. I've seen these irrational attacks on LSE before, it's something I factor in with situations as I have not been immune to it, as in I have experienced such situations. Might be the weak N which doesn't realize people are not always interested in the best course of action, but would rather everyone was dissatisfied to match their own dissatisfaction rather than doing truly more constructive, but it is life.

I figured she looked at the whole situation in a holistic approach. I didn't like that the SEE had no solution about how she would approach a chaotic situation if one occurred with 4 children on board. Also, from a personal experience when we came to the US my brother was 7 years old. He and my sister almost terrorized the walk way of the giant plane, running around and misbehaving no matter how stern my father got. Controlling that situation is not easy but to refuse in a way that is putting someone down when she has not experienced it to feel the affects of it and neither can she empathize with the LSE was not nice. I would have approached the counter argument very differently. I would have said "I realize that your concerns is to make sure that the situation doesn't become chaotic, what would a behavioral psychologist suggest?" I would not start attacking her. Kind of "let's explore other possibilities"

[Beautiful sky]

I think drugging your children like that sets them up for a future of drug abuse. It is not sensible. It is changing their brain chemistry. Those things are not safe. I became dependent on antihistamines. I am kind of disgusted with the brunette and only watched a couple minutes.

I didn't even watch the blonde. I had to turn it off because of the brunette.

Edit: Turned it back on. lol This woman has no common sense guys. Like they said if the child had a reaction at 37,000 feet what do you do? I have had allergic reactions to benadryl. I wouldn't have got all emotional like the blonde who is also starting to irritate me the way she is raising her voice.

My advice, don't travel long distances with small children. You choose to become a parent so you have to give up some things.

It's not done all the time

[Aylen]

I figured she looked at the whole situation in a holistic approach. I didn't like that the SEE had no solution about how she would approach a chaotic situation if one occurred with 4 children on board. Also, from a personal experience when we came to the US my brother was 7 years old. He and my sister almost terrorized the walk way of the giant plane, running around and misbehaving no matter how stern my father got. Controlling that situation is not easy but to refuse in a way that is putting someone down when she has not experienced it to feel the affects of it and neither can she empathize with the LSE was not nice. I would have approached the counter argument very differently. I would have said "I realize that your concerns is to make sure that the situation doesn't become chaotic, what would a behavioral psychologist suggest?" I would not start attacking her.

When we moved to the US my sister was like only a year and half and I was 3 and a half. My mom said we were both well behaved (my sister slept through most of it) and I struck up a conversation with the flight attendant, even though I could not speak English. She promised to give me wings if I behaved. I don't know how I was able to understand that because my parents did not speak English either but maybe little children understand the language of energy. Anxious parents tend to have children that reflect their worst fears back to them through their behavior. My bio-dad is a very calming type person and can influence emotionally, being an EIE. I am assuming he had something to do with my good behavior since he probably kept me engaged instead of ignoring me. I needed a lot of verbal interaction as a child.

She kept her promise and I still have the little wings pin she gave me.

I learned most of this in basic child psychology classes. My youngest sister had terrible stomach pain as an infant and had to be sedated. She is also the one who was a C average student. I wonder if all that sedation, as a baby, had something to do with it. :/

[Beautiful sky]

When we moved to the US my sister was like only a year and half and I was 3 and a half. My mom said we were both well behaved (my sister slept through most of it) and I struck up a conversation with the flight attendant, even though I could not speak English. She promised to give me wings if I behaved. I don't know how I was able to understand that because my parents did not speak English either but maybe little children understand the language of energy. Anxious parents tend to have children that reflect their worst fears back to them through their behavior. My bio-dad is a very calming type person and can influence emotionally, being an EIE. I am assuming he had something to do with my good behavior since he probably kept me engaged instead of ignoring me. I needed a lot of verbal interaction as a child.

She kept her promise and I still have the little wings pin she gave me.

I learned most of this in basic child psychology classes. My youngest sister had terrible stomach pain as an infant and had to be sedated. She is also the one who was a C average student. I wonder if all that sedation, as a baby, had something to do with it. :/

Aww the curious introvert

My siblings are both extrovert and they were terrors fighting with each other and all manner of hissing

[lemontrees]

I've seen multiple SEE's refer to LSE's as "controlling" or "inflexible". They are friends with the LSE but wonder how anyone could stand dating the LSE, for example.

On the LSE end, the only example I've observed is my dad, married to my SEE mom. She's basically very irrational (NTR), makes bad emotive decisions, and he knows better but feels like he can't say no. It's like she disorients him- he does a lot of things around her that he would otherwise not do, and afterwards you can see that he is resentful.

[Aylen]

It's not done all the time

It doesn't make it right though but a parent does has a right to do with their children what they want, within limits. I am more concerned with the idea of drugging children under age 2. The parent will never know if it had a lasting effect on that child's brain. We know that alcohol can damage the brain in utero, sometimes even very little at the wrong time of development will cause developmental damage. My mom drank wine with dinner while pregnant. Not a lot but who knows what that did to my brain. I might have been a physicist if she hadn't. With the knowledge I have now, I would be more protective of a child's brain.

If I had a cranky toddler going through terrible twos, I would not take them to a restaurant out of consideration of other people. To me that is common sense but I have sat in restaurants with people trying to calm a cranky child that is obviously out too late instead of getting their food to go. Like I said in the other post, people who choose to have children will have to make sacrifices and to me sacrificing leisure activities for the benefit of the child is not a huge sacrifice.

[Aylen]

Aww the curious introvert

My siblings are both extrovert and they were terrors fighting with each other and all manner of hissing

We are all introverts except my ESE sister but she was and is very well mannered. My IEI brother is well mannered too, in public, but when he was little he could be very blunt as he picked up certain things that should not have been spoken outside the family. hahah He was too young to know better.

Edit: I did fight with my EII sister the most but that was because we were forced to spend too much time cooped up together. As we matured we learned to respect each other's opinions. We don't always agree and even have snapped verbally at each other a couple of times, as adults, we get along really well and we make up quickly. My family is very important to me.

[Beautiful sky]

We are all introverts except my ESE sister but she was and is very well mannered. My IEI brother is well mannered too, in public, but when he was little he could be very blunt as he picked up certain things that should not have been spoken outside the family. hahah He was too young to know better.

Edit: I did fight with my EII sister the most but that was because we were forced to spend too much time cooped up together. As we matured we learned to respect each other's opinions. We don't always agree and even have snapped at each other a couple of times, as adult, we get along really well.

Se/ni approach would have been to take the kids to the doctor. Get an ADD diagnoses and load the kids up with all manner of ADD meds. I've unseen this with LSI who couldn't control over active child.

I realized I'm coming off like your sister please excuse me

[Aylen]

Se/ni approach would have been to take the kids to the doctor. Get an ADD diagnoses and load the kids up with all manner of ADD meds. I've unseen this with LSI who couldn't control over active child.

I realized I'm coming off like your sister please excuse me

Fortunately my LSI mom, coming from a different culture, did not allow me to be drugged except in a crisis situation at a hospital when I was 13. She just accepted what the doctors said but did not make me continue. I chose to take medication on my own as an adult to her dismay (at first). She is an E1 and had a hard time accepting that anything was wrong with me. She just wanted me to get up and do something when I was too depressed to get out of bed. She powers through her depression most of the time to get things done. She had to since she had two small children at the time to support on her own. Oh and she suffers from insomnia and I remember her taking nyquil as a child and some Valium. I used to think she lacked empathy (she does in a sense and I know it may be socionics related now) so we went through some difficulties when I was a preteen/teen.

My youngest sister was in excruciating pain as a baby so medication was the last resort. They called it colic and she screamed for hours while tightening her stomach and pushing her little legs. No one had ever dealt with a colicky baby before in my family so it was a stressful period. I think medication does have it's place but not for the comfort of the parent. I mean obviously if your child has something organically wrong with their brain, and is a danger to themselves or others, you might have to resort to meds but I would exhaust every option first.

[Aylen]

I realized I'm coming off like your sister please excuse me

Hahahaha yeah it's ok. I think it's cool you remember what I told you about us. You two have a similar approach to health issues and it is one of the reasons I knew you were EII.

[Beautiful sky]

Thank you for putting this so well.

Your response is to me a very good one, perhaps even perfect haha

I am not sure how it may look to others, but the LSE is trying to make the best decision possible given the available information and tried and tested methods, the intention is good. In such a situation, when the LSE is attacked, it leads to puzzlement for the LSE, as in, why am I being attacked? I do not mean any harm I am trying to produce the best solution to the situation, so it's confusing for them.

Suggesting other courses of study is a good one, as in the behavioral psychologist, because it is working together and finding more information from respected and experienced sources, based on a wide range of studies and information. It leads to more information to be able to reach the right decision, which is what the LSE wants.

I agree when you say that you did not like the SEE approach with having no solution. This is something that has perplexed me, because I have found myself in similar situations to the LSE in this video, and i've thought to myself, why the attacks, and what would you do? Which leads me to think perhaps there is something else going on. I suppose, what I am now considering, is that my Te is so much a part of me that I don't stop to think that others don't want a solution and think this is OK? Still seems a little strange to me, but I realize I don't understand everything in this realm of all other people.

That is as best as I can say about it for now. Thank you for your insight, i'm somewhat more glad I commented to begin with now, it's been helpful.

If an LSE became a bit more insisting that they had weighed the information as they do take initiative into their hands, I would support them and go with it. "Let's hope for the best"

[Beautiful sky]

I completely empathize with you @Aylen and the SEE. You guys are looking at the immediate information and you Aylen are drawing from personal experience from the past and are also trying to safeguard a bad situation which is what the SEE is doing too. I guess if you both had come from a culture where "they did it or I did it and it was okay" you would look at the situation differently..

I've seen multiple SEE's refer to LSE's as "controlling" or "inflexible". They are friends with the LSE but wonder how anyone could stand dating the LSE, for example.

On the LSE end, the only example I've observed is my dad, married to my SEE mom. She's basically very irrational (NTR), makes bad emotive decisions, and he knows better but feels like he can't say no. It's like she disorients him- he does a lot of things around her that he would otherwise not do, and afterwards you can see that he is resentful.

Would you happen to have a specific examples? @lemontrees

[ClownsandEntropy]

Lol

What do you think about each of their approach on the topic?

Well firstly I think that they're going in with a difficult frame of how they want to discuss - they both have an opinion and aren't interested in hearing the other's opinion, they just want to explain their own position. If they really cared about The Truth then they would be a lot of collaborative about it.

Furthermore, they make statements which may not be backed up, factually. Like, they might be backed up, but they take time to show proof that it is. So you've got to rely on their words, which I can't do because they're trying to win, not to find The Truth, and so they'd be willing to fabricate.

Idk, it just was't set up to allow either of them to discuss it reasonably.

[Beautiful sky]

Well firstly I think that they're going in with a difficult frame of how they want to discuss - they both have an opinion and aren't interested in hearing the other's opinion, they just want to explain their own position. If they really cared about The Truth then they would be a lot of collaborative about it.

Furthermore, they make statements which may not be backed up, factually. Like, they might be backed up, but they take time to show proof that it is. So you've got to rely on their words, which I can't do because they're trying to win, not to find The Truth, and so they'd be willing to fabricate.

Idk, it just was't set up to allow either of them to discuss it reasonably.

You couldn't make your Fe searching more apparent

[Beautiful sky]

Ashton Kutcher LSE
Mila Kunis SEE

Fight has started and this is going to go exactly as this benefit pair will as it did between Chris Martin LSE and Gweneth Paltrow SEE. Straight for divorce

http://www.intouchweekly.com/posts/a...ighting-110366

Her complaint is he doesn't follow directions and is irresponsible but only because he doesn't want to be the submissive one in the beneficiary position