Unless they are "serious" type girls who love it and get put off by "merry" males. It goes both ways.Originally Posted by suedehead
If you are ESI, you have no typing excuse for not being attractive to the Te girls. The problem of not getting girlfriends is elsewhere and not with being any type.
That's a trite generalization. Different girls are into different kinds of guys.
All types have alphas, and players, and men who are successful at having many relationships.
He is not my current partner. My current partner is not that "highly accomplished" or that confident and alluring... but he likes his job nevertheless.
And I was only correcting your generalizing view of Fi dom. (and Se polr ...).
Last edited by Amber; 05-13-2015 at 08:34 PM.
gay men are even pickier about who they have sex with
reality is there to be changed and created the way you want it to be
if you go around with the attitude that your type prevents you from "getting pussy", then this is how your life will be
socionics type =/= your personality
Yeah, I had a 20/21 year old neighbor who is SLE and most girls thought he was hot. He was attractive and I witnessed him sneaking lots of different girls out his back door so his dad wouldn't see them. Sometimes more than one girl in the same weekend. He went after me hard. I decided early on that I didn't have any interest in him that way. I don't think he was depraved but he was a player and I heard him verbally abuse his ex and knew right away that he was not worth the risk. I felt zero chemistry even though he felt something I think it was all below the waist. I am happy he moved state because his attempts on me were getting more aggressive and tiring. At first I was flattered and amused by him.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
I don't think he has a job, but somehow he assumes he's better than someone who's trying
Where he goes wrong...again
i don't particularly think highly of people who have "getting laid" as their primary reason for wanting to interact with me. to sort of flip the perspective, getting laid has never been my reason for wanting to talk to anyone. curiosity or wanting to know someone or wanting to know more about them or understand them could be a reason. wishing for attention could be a reason. realizing i feel like i already know this person and wanting to know why could be a reason. the point is, i don't really think of people in this "hey, you're like a guy and i'm like a girl and like there's only one possible way people of the opposite sex can ever interact because like we're so different because of our difference in biological sex and that's like more important than really anything else" way.
if you want to "get laid" i suggest finding the other people who only think of people in the way you do: as interactive bed warmers. find where they all congregate. also there are websites for this--just for getting laid. create a profile and post your picture. you can even use craigslist... there are tons of ads about getting laid there, from both males and females.
and i can't see this as type related... there is no magical type that's a sex god. there just isn't. type, imo, isn't all that significant of a factor to evaluate a person by.
also, as others have probably said, you don't have to fit some "alpha male" role. i don't think most men fit this role really. it's a fantasy.
Lse because they are very manipulative and persistent
-
Dual type(as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Onr lse coworker has slept or had sexual encounters with 10 or 15 women since the age of 17 when he was in a serious relationship. ..I do get how sensory types like sli can make a sport out of sex
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
not to mention what arnold schwarzenegger did with women. especially in elevators.
Lse like games. I suppose subtle approach. Paying extra attention to women. Buying them lunch. Paying complimants and just giving them lots of attention. It's manipulative because it's attention that is customed like if a girl likes dirt bike riding the lse too will demonstrate their knowledge in that area...aligning interests. That's how that horrible LSEwho was here manipulated meny claiming to have intetest in socionics while convincing himself that he was genuinely interested in a relationship with me
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
I was a big slut in my early twenties.
True. I agree. I always forget the outliers that is people who have sex in thr hundreds
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Only because he was hiding his real self from others in order to be liked
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
And I'm convinced SLE. The "Aggressor" style would fit for the complaint here. But we agree on Beta.
"A man with a definite belief always appears bizarre, because he does not change with the world; he has climbed into a fixed star, and the earth whizzes below him like a zoetrope."
........ G. ........... K. ............... C ........ H ........ E ...... S ........ T ...... E ........ R ........ T ........ O ........ N ........
"Having a clear faith, based on the creed of the Church, is often labeled today as fundamentalism... Whereas relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and swept along
by every wind of teaching, looks like the only
attitude acceptable to today's standards." - Pope Benedict the XVI, "The Dictatorship of Relativism"
.
.
.
The 3 fundamentals of getting laid
1. Having an attractive/interesting lifestyle (Take care of your health, pursue passions, do cool stuff) Quality of girls you get
2. Overcoming fear/anxiety around girls (Basically putting yourself out there. The more you approach the higher the laid percentage) Quantity of girls of you get
3. Learning how to express/communicate/seduce (Using humor, charisma, connecting etc. This is basically "game" or PUA stuff.) Efficiency of girls you get
Based off this, I'd wager an SLE over an EII with everything else being equal.
SLEs are IMO naturally smooth talkers and can generally get what they want.
Last edited by Computer Loser; 05-21-2015 at 02:14 AM.
what on earth does this even mean : Efficiency of girls you get
and the person above is most likely SLI>LSI btw
That doesn't gibe with any studies I've ever encountered of the frequency of sex among gay men and their number of partners. Or do you mean their assessments of people are more stringent?
Golden is right. Once all that stupid homophobia crap is done away with, being a gay man will be a sweet, sweet deal.
Whatever you're talking about hasn't got anything to do with what I posted, which is only about multiple studies regarding the frequency of sex, between gay male partners, and the overall number of sexual partners relative to sexual orientation. I didn't say any of this is good, bad, or indifferent, my only assumptions being along these lines: that it's probably good if you get about as much sex as you'd like to have, and good for a relationship, if you're in one, if you and your partner agree on the amount of sex you want to have.
What do you mean by this? Can you elaborate?
I'm having trouble understanding what you are saying, but maybe that's because I have a hard time separating sex that is more than an impulse thing from relationships. I mean, if I like a woman enough to want to have sex with her, it means I like her enough to want to have a relationship with her, too. Otherwise, it is just too much trouble.
Or, wait. Do you mean that men will sleep with anyone, but will only consider marrying a very few?
What a silly Beta Fe cliche. (vive Aristocracy).
Some men are less picky than some women. Attractive, intelligent, and accomplished men are quite picky. They have lots of standards. Sx first is also damn demanding and "picky" in an involuntary way. (won't go into relationships with ppl they're not crazy about).
Some sexist viewpoint I think
me ! me !
Is that what you've been doing since you went away
I think I just succeeded in making not-so-much disgusting coffee out of fucking randomness, I'm like "Jesus, thank you to have heard my prayers".
Its a phase, and sadly some men never grow out of it. They become shallow man children, the 30, 40, 50 year olds who can't even understand basic intimacy. Its a path I refuse to walk down. Quality over quantity for me.
I dunno about this cause there are plenty of low average and good looking girls who go home on their own at night and the same thing for the guys. On paper it looks like you will be right but if a girl is taking home some guy she doesn't even know then what does that say about her in regards to her safety etc and what does it say about the guy. I think one night stands happen but usually they happen when someone is at a low point in their life or they don't understand intimacy, who knows though maybe i'm naive over this.
BTW I am not speaking from the POV of a guy who hasn't engaged in a one night stand, but they've happened usually because: 1. I've split up with someone and it seems like the rebound might be a good idea or 2. The girl approached me and seemed quite nice only for me to sober up and think WTF. I also had what would have been a one night stand and continued to see the girl, I discovered her having a lot of self esteem issues.
There are books on every subject for someone to cash in on the needy, whether the books have good intentions or not. As for the other stuff, a lot of it is social conditioning, when we look past what we are told to believe and develop a mind for ourselves then we can begin to connect with what we as the individual wants for their happiness rather than trying to live by media or agenda constructed stereotypes.
I stand by my point that it's easy for anyone to get laid, plenty of people of all shapes and persuasions go out and don't go for sex. And anyway if someone can afford to go out to a club all night there's a fair chance they can pay for a prostitute, if it is just about sex, save themself the hassle of having a stranger in their house over night.
OK i'm beginning to sound like some sort of Matrix prophet or sth.
ehh. women just have needs too, the way men do.
you wanna still get to have sex even when you aren't committed to anyone/ don't like anyone/ don't have time to date anyone. not sayin' it's totally the same situation, but to judge girls for taking men home is a bit backwards, to me.
EDIT: sorry, i guess you were judging the dudes too. yeah, there are many reasons one night stands can be more convenient, even though it's not what people want all the time.
I think it's fair to say they have less of a regard for their safety if they take a stranger into their house as opposed to someone who won't let a stranger into their house. Now if someone has less of a regard for their safety, what else are they reckless in? Could be a passing phase, could be something else.
If you class that as judging then I am guilty as charged.
Only the first sentence was referring to your statement. The second sentence is solely related to my own normative aspirations, so it's just a misunderstanding. In retrospect, I should have probably put a few line breaks between them.
Facts: you're a mentally sick less-than-average-looking stupid guy with absolutely no future. You tried to work in a fast food, right. But it was too demanding and you don't wanna study medicine, hot momma. You are relatively ugly physically ...but most of your ugliness comes from your emotional baggage. Prolly tons of rejections+ lack of any passions in life + no intelligence to push through it.
Instead of taking a realistic check at where he's at he's filling his head with nonesense about picking up "10"s on PUA kerb crawls, screeching for love and attention on the internet forums and probably everywhere else, yet when someone gives him the attention he needs ie tells him where it's really at, instead of taking it on board and realising where he has to work from and build on, he gets pissy with that person and tries attacking them.
This is even more vile, because he doesn't even want to hear constructive feedback, he wants to have his ego massaged by telling him he's great being a looser, and really what a flaccid ego that is, to anyone, friend or prospective partner.
BTW, I have no issues with someone who works in any job, what matters is the person is trying and they have a certain level of principle and earned respect, which can be gained from average job to hot shot London lawyer (albeit the money is different, heh)
Lol. Take a WILD fucking guess what it could even mean given the context.
A player would be more efficient at pulling woman than a man that never interacts with woman.
And you're most likely ESI-dumbbbb>ESI-Fi btw
Last edited by Computer Loser; 05-21-2015 at 02:23 AM.
You still do not make sense
Then your English is not ok .... you should have said Efficiency of Seduction or smth. It sounded as if the girls were (supposed to be) efficient.
In the rest of your response you clearly got reactive and defensive ...which kinda means you dislike being signaled you use Te and no Se. A LII confirmed my impression ...so you're right to be pissed off. You don't VI Beta+Se creative in pics, either. A few goofy and meek attempts at smiling are not LSI.
Last edited by Amber; 05-21-2015 at 09:27 AM.
My Te is tingling…. It’s telling me… You’re a fucking idiot. SLI indeed.
Lol. Here come the pussy worshippers to the rescue.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
