Why is ESI (ISFj) the aggressor and not the caring type in Gluenko's erotic attitudes?

[Zero]

Description of careful due to sociotype.com:

• attraction is naturally sparked by the perceived aesthetic attributes of the prospective partner, but cooled off if such attributes are * accompanied by a perception of "too aggressive" sexuality
• inclination towards tenderness, "soft" rather than "hard" approach
• prone to adopt maternal approach to the physical comfort and needs of partner
• interest is further maintained if partner welcomes this approach
• prone to assume that partner will need help in practical, daily matters

isn't ESI very attentive and caring to partner's needs? "the caregiver" "the guardian". usually distinguished by caring very much about close people's health. maybe sex is a different category from health?

and this is the description of aggressor due to sociotype.com:

• no doubts about own interest in another person
• not prone to hesitation about whether or not to reveal that interest
• focus is more on own interest than whether or not the other person might reciprocate
• romantic interaction is more about "toughness" than "tenderness"
• needs to feel some sense of "superiority" over the partner, but worthwhile only if the partner is seen as able to largely "keep up"
• this takes the form of power games, which others might regard as cruel or bitchy
• in the case of female Aggressors with male partners, the above tends to assume the characteristic of a woman expecting total * devotion from the partner, rather than her being "bossy"
• little inclination to externally admit not having been the one to end a relationship, unless if adopting a "who cares" front simultaneously

ESIs seem to have a strong sexual nature (they are SEE's mirror afterall ) but not aggressive, perhaps the names are misleading, translated from Russian? it is also said and is true that LIE and EIE don't identify with the name "victim" either, i myself wouldn't identify with the adjective.

Here's also a good minimalist description : http://definitive-socionics.wikidot....otic-attitudes

And again like many things in socionics the problem is that it is not very clearly explained why exactly having Se ego makes one an aggressor and having Ni makes them victim etc.

[FDG]

Because they have Se. Erotic attitudes are related to irrational functions in the ego block.

The theory is actually incomplete, there should be erotic attitudes for rational (base) functions too, because they modulate the person's response to the environment.

[Zero]

Because they have Se. Erotic attitudes are related to irrational functions in the ego block.

The theory is actually incomplete, there should be erotic attitudes for rational (base) functions too, because they modulate the person's response to the environment.

yes but discussing about these issues, they always consider irrational functions also for "who takes initiative first"; in many places I have seen the saying that "LIEs don't take initiative in sex" because of Si PoLR, they also say that LIEs feel they are ugly and don't really like themselves, too tall, too short, too fat, too thin, add as needed. But then it writes LIE is the active partner while ESI keeps relations from stagnation. Something doesn't sound right to me here. LIE is also obviously the one who takes initiative in becoming friends with ESI. It all sounds too "unsure".

[Zero]

Because they have Se. Erotic attitudes are related to irrational functions in the ego block.

The theory is actually incomplete, there should be erotic attitudes for rational (base) functions too, because they modulate the person's response to the environment.

And what I mean is how exactly does their Se ego (ESIs) affect them in their behavior so that they are considered aggressors.

[Olimpia]

isn't ESI very attentive and caring to partner's needs? "the caregiver" "the guardian". usually distinguished by caring very much about close people's health. maybe sex is a different category from health?

Somehow this gives me the impression you are equating ESI with MBTI ISFJ and their stereotypes, which I think is not accurate and misleading.

The Caregiver attitude and so on, is mostly characteristic of SEIs. They are lead, they do value .
ESIs have Demonstrative , which means they are proficient at it and will take care of those matters when necessary, but it is not something they truly care about.

In short, ESIs aren't the Caregiver Romance Style, because they are not Ego and do not value , like FDG already said.

[Olimpia]

The theory is actually incomplete, there should be erotic attitudes for rational (base) functions too, because they modulate the person's response to the environment.

This sounds like you have already thought about how those rational functions influence the romance styles.
Could you expand on that?

[Zero]

Somehow this gives me the impression you are equating ESI with MBTI ISFJ and their stereotypes, which I think is not accurate and misleading.

Not at all. I haven't read about MBTI very much but I see in some socionics related articles they call ESI the caretaker, and they truly are, in matters of health and creating a pleasant emotional atmosphere for the people they care about, but as for caring about it in a Si way, of course not

[Chae]

And again like many things in socionics the problem is that it is not very clearly explained why exactly having Se ego makes one an aggressor and having Ni makes them victim etc.

Yes, they assigned modes of behavior but didn't back it up with the process behind it.

Time to change that! Back to the roots, here we go.

• The Action(s) inside a Temporal Framework ---> Se ego lends ability for conducting physical impact on another body, aka object in space. Its constant practice inspires confidence. Se is objective awareness and consequently knowing how to guide movement and haptic interaction, making the Se ego person resolute in their approach of wanting to attend to their partner. It prioritizes concrete physical action over consequence estimation, motivated (Se as creative IM) or supported (Se as lead IM) by what action makes sense to them or one's relation to the partner, i.e. Ti or Fi.

in contrast to:

• The Temporal Framework that encompasses Action(s) ---> Ni ego lends ability for estimating consequences of scenarios. Its constant practice leads to a stance of having lived through everything mentally without having actually experienced it. Ni is the subjective inside imagination, detached from the object in space, preventing its user from the hands-on initiative because they are too busy calculating results. It prioritizes consequence estimation over concrete physical action, motivated (Ni as creative IM) or supported (Ni as lead IM) by what is situationally profitable or the situation's energetic expression, i.e. Te or Fe.

I call them Proactive (Se) and Coordinating (Ni) styles instead of aggressor and victim.

Aggression, by definition, means that you act with the intent of hurting someone. Victims are defined by having their consent stepped on, they do not want to be harmed. Transferring that to romantic attitudes is equalling this specific partner interaction with rape. Gulenko wasn't woke enough to realize that, completely missing the social dynamic that he wanted to describe. Instead, he came at us with this ancient rhetoric of interpersonal violence instead of expressing love.

That needs to be rectified. The point is not that Ni ego resists and Se is intrusive! TL;DR:
----> Se ego contributes with romantic/erotic implementation driven by their subjective view on Ti and Fi through the energy, whereabouts, the best handling and realisation.
----> Ni ego contributes timing, circumstance or arrangement, and the proper way that leads toward either fulfilling objective Te or Fe matters for both of them. That's it.

[Pallas]

ESI = femme fatale
ISFJ = maternal caregiver

Welcome to socionics, which is definitely not MBTI even if it's often just as bad (see: the "LIEs kill kittens and puppies!" thread).

[Pallas]

Aggression, by definition, means that you act with the intent of hurting someone. Victims are defined by having their consent stepped on, they do not want to be harmed. Transferring that to romantic attitudes is equalling this specific partner interaction with rape. Gulenko wasn't woke enough to realize that, completely missing the social dynamic that he wanted to describe. Instead, he came at us with this ancient rhetoric of interpersonal violence instead of expressing love.

I heard that the terms used there don't translate well from Russian so it might not be entirely his fault that we have a bunch of people in other countries making it into basically rape even if he is responsible for awful things like DCNH subtypes along with actually good ideas.

[mclane]

ESI have demonstrative +Si. This means that initially they will give the impression of being an alpha caregiver. But once the relationship becomes closer, it becomes apparent that they are actually aggressors. They can be quite pushy.

[Olimpia]

ESI have demonstrative +Si. This means that initially they will give the impression of being an alpha caregiver. But once the relationship becomes closer, it becomes apparent that they are actually aggressors. They can be quite pushy.

I mostly agree, though not all ESIs will seem like Caregivers initially.
But they can surely seem like them in certain situations.

Besides that, I find the HA can also have an influence, esp. when the individual is Inert subtype.
Some ESI-Fi individuals can seem like a Victim type at times. Just like some ESEs or LSEs can seem a bit Childlike sometimes, having Ne HA. Or LIE-Te and EIE-Fe can seem a bit like an Aggressor because of "boosted" Se HA, etc.

Subtype and Enneagram type probably influence whether the individual will bring forth their Demonstrative or HA more in romantic situations, likely depending on who they are dealing with. But beyond a certain stage, the "real" Romance Style will become apparent, inevitably.

[FDG]

And what I mean is how exactly does their Se ego (ESIs) affect them in their behavior so that they are considered aggressors.

Yes you're right, socionics is a descriptive theory (as Jung created his functions based on behavioral descriptions) and thus we do not have a clear answer as to "why someone behaves in such a way due to being Se ego".

I can't help you with this But I agree that ESI show a lot of "caretaking" behaviors in the lexical non-socionics sense. Especially subtypes who are less strong on Se.

[Resonare]

She also likes a man who thinks quickly on his feet and shows mental acuity. If you have all of these characteristics, then, there is no doubt, that she will make you marry her sufficiently quickly, because DREISERKA is a girl marked by drive and determination; she follows through with her goals. And she never steps back from her purpose.

LIE and EIE can sporadically display good usage of Se, but ultimately strength in the 2D functions are weak and all for show. Once you know the Hidden Agenda and Role functions of a type not much will appear contradictory in the descriptions.

[Olimpia]

Aggression, by definition, means that you act with the intent of hurting someone. Victims are defined by having their consent stepped on, they do not want to be harmed. Transferring that to romantic attitudes is equalling this specific partner interaction with rape. Gulenko wasn't woke enough to realize that, completely missing the social dynamic that he wanted to describe. Instead, he came at us with this ancient rhetoric of interpersonal violence instead of expressing love.

That needs to be rectified. The point is not that Ni ego resists and Se is intrusive! TL;DR:
----> Se ego contributes with romantic/erotic implementation driven by their subjective view on Ti and Fi through the energy, whereabouts, the best handling and realisation.
----> Ni ego contributes timing, circumstance or arrangement, and the proper way that leads toward either fulfilling objective Te or Fe matters for both of them. That's it.

I appreciate your way of adding more explanations or descriptions to the discussion.
However, personally I find it easier and more fitting to keep the original "Aggressor/Victim" terminology, even though it can be controversial.

How I see it, is that the Aggressor/Victim dynamic is not an abstract equivalent to actual rape. In the most extreme sense, it is rather like "rape play".

Is it "rape" when one person has a rape fantasy, and they tell their partner about it, and they make a consensual agreement to play out that fantasy?
I do not think so. And I would say the same applies to the Aggressor/Victim dynamic, in a sense.

The Victim/Aggressor dynamic is the good old "playing hard to get", or rather, the Victim is actually "hard to get" and the Aggressor is thrilled by the "hunt" of "capturing" the Victim, while the Victim gets a thrill out of being "captured" by someone worthy or in other words to relinquish control to someone worthy. That is why I equated the Victim/Aggressor dynamic with the Prey/Predator dynamic in the animal kingdom in a blog post of mine. (Though this is not the best analogy, because the prey doesn't want to be captured. )

The other Romance Styles "do not get it" – I am pretty sure those countless blog posts, articles, and so forth about the question "Do I have to play hard to get?" are written by women who aren't Victim and likely not Aggressor either, but instead Caretaker, and once in a while Childlike. The men they are interested in are mostly Aggressors, and would respond well to the "hard to get" scenario, so that is why they are often trying to "play hard to get" to appease or thrill those men, but it typically doesn't work too well for them. It is better to be true to your Romance Style, so you find the right fit for yourself. Otherwise, you'll have to fake another romance style the entire time while being with this person, and that would be tiring and frustrating to say the least.


For and valuing individuals, romantic/sexual interactions are primarily about force, power, and control: who exerts it and who "takes" it or who "channels" it.

Rape is certainly a "forceful" act, it exerts force on someone unwilling. I suppose the term "Victim" comes a bit too close to the term "Rape victim"...
The Victim may seem to be the "victim" in a sexual situation (mostly applicable to Beta NFs in the most literal sense), but they actually enjoy it.
Whereas real rape victims didn't enjoy the act, obviously.

So again, the Victim/Aggressor dynamic is more like "rape play". And I suppose Childlike/Caretaker is more like "baby play"?
Of course I am describing the most extreme versions here. For most people, the interplay is much more subtle.

All in all, that is why I like the original terminology. It hints at the most basic dynamic behind the styles, aka what I described as "rape play" vs "baby play".

P.S: I'd like to add that in the sexual sense, even Aggressor women like the idea of a guy being more forceful than them, or at least they rather have a guy being forceful than being Caretaker-like, because they value . And the Victim men, especially the Pseudo-Victim ones, also often prefer playing the "perpetrator" opposed to the hardcore "Victim" in a sexual scenario, because they also value . However, when it comes to the romantic interaction and how couples came together, I note that the Romance Styles will be rather true to themselves and fit the descriptions, more or less.

[darya]

Not at all. I haven't read about MBTI very much but I see in some socionics related articles they call ESI the caretaker, and they truly are, in matters of health and creating a pleasant emotional atmosphere for the people they care about, but as for caring about it in a Si way, of course not

Yes, they are dilligent, and it's in all descriptions (not so much as in pleasant "emotional" atmosphere though), but as in keeping house clean, cooking, being responsible for buying food and goods for household, preparing holiday family celebrations etc. They are mostly e6 and e1/e2, so dilligence comes with the territory. They are much more worrisome than SEI's, who are more lazy and first care about their own comfort - ESI's don't care about their own body needs first and foremost, but care more about their family and being loyal to their people - so their family gets taken care of first - because that's correct and loyal behaviour (they're very principled and resposible in that way).

But besides being caretakery around the house, they are also quite strict and demanding (rules and discipline in behaviour they expect to be followed) - certain pushiness comes naturally to them (that's the Se).

[Olimpia]

P.S: I'd like to add that in the sexual sense, even Aggressor women like the idea of a guy being more forceful than them, or at least they rather have a guy being forceful than being Caretaker-like, because they value . And the Victim men, especially the Pseudo-Victim ones, also often prefer playing the "perpetrator" opposed to the hardcore "Victim" in a sexual scenario, because they also value .

I just remembered a story by a male ILE-Ti about his sex with a woman who valued , and was likely Gamma SF (partly paraphrasing; and mind you, he is not entirely serious haha).

 

This was one of the first women I had ever sex with. And I noticed she was one of those women who like it when you spank her or bite her neck. Kind of like aggressive, or something like that. Not all girls like that, to be clear. I remember she was like "Bite my neck!" and I was like "I don't want to!" and she's like "Bite it!" - "I really don't want to!" And she's just like "Just bite it, bite it now!" And I was like "Okay, anything for sex!" And I remember how I just bit into it, and I was almost gonna cry. And I was biting it, and she was like "More, more!" And I remember, she was getting me to bite her décolletage, and I was having sex with her while biting it, and she's like "Oh god, yes, bite me you wild stallion, oh yes". And I was like "No, noooo". And later my buddy saw her neck after we came out, and he was like "What did you do to her?" and I was like "Oh no, I was raped, I don't know what happened!"

I would pay money and go out of my way to avoid being cut up, bitten, spanked and choked and things like that. I go to great lengths in my life in general to avoid those situations.

[darya]

So if you like to get spanked you're suddenly an agressor ? Or is it simply voicing your needs?

[darya]

I'm certain Queen Elizabeth, who's definitely an ESI, always rapes her lovers.

[Adam Strange]

I just remembered a story by a male ILE-Ti about his sex with a woman who valued , and was likely Gamma SF (partly paraphrasing; and mind you, he is not entirely serious haha).

 

As long as we are relating Aggressor stories,

 

---The first part of this story is a bunch of words which are completely unrelated to the story because the Activity Stream pickup function does not respect spoiler tags---

I (a LIE) was having sex with an LSI (Aggressor), and she was under me on the bed with her head turned to the side, and I bit her ear with my teeth; not biting, just holding, and she smiled and said "I like that."

I liked it, too. I would classify my actions as "demonstrable proof of my affection, which is directed to one person alone."

And yes, this is very different from sex with a Caregiver.

[Olimpia]

So if you like to get spanked you're suddenly an agressor ? Or is it simply voicing your needs?

Hm, I am not saying that.
Of course it depends on the individual woman. In that particular story, it struck me as the Childlike-Aggressor dynamic.

As far as I know, most people who like the whole "being spanked or spanking for having been naughty" (aka the "moral punishment") scenario in the bedroom are and valuing.
So, that includes Gammas as well as Deltas, and particularly ESI and EII women like to be spanked and male Te leads to spank like that, ime.

And "rough sex" in the most general (and animalistic ) sense is typically involving one or both people being valuing.

But again, those are just the general trends, not necessarily "rules".

[Persephone]

Hm, I am not saying that.
Of course it depends on the individual woman. In that particular story, it struck me as the Childlike-Aggressor dynamic.

As far as I know, most people who like the whole "being spanked or spanking for having been naughty" (aka the "moral punishment") scenario in the bedroom are and valuing.
So, that includes Gammas as well as Deltas, and particularly ESI and EII women like to be spanked and male Te leads to spank like that, ime.

And "rough sex" in the most general (and animalistic ) sense is typically involving one or both people being valuing.

But again, those are just the general trends, not necessarily "rules".

Holyshit

[darya]

Holyshit

It's amazing how we're accused of not being Ti valuing for disagreeing with Cassandra's theories when Adam as Te-lead and her supposed supervisor is a nr. 1 fan of them (which proves nothing ofc, but is hilarious nonetheless).

[Olimpia]

It's amazing how we're accused of not being Ti valuing for disagreeing with Cassandra's theories when Adam as Te-lead and her supposed supervisor is a nr. 1 fan of them (which proves nothing ofc, but is hilarious nonetheless).

Haha, I think he just likes them because he has observed similar things.

[darya]

Haha, I think he just likes them because he has observed similar things.

That's shit with socionics - there's also an convenient way to spin everything it's just that you said that not believing putting every human behaviour in a neat box makes person Ti-devaluing and Hitta told you that numerous times, but you still type him LII. It's just self-typed beta NF's that seeem to be under this criteria (and are under much stricter scrunity in general)

[Adam Strange]

It's amazing how we're accused of not being Ti valuing for disagreeing with Cassandra's theories when Adam as Te-lead and her supposed supervisor is a nr. 1 fan of them (which proves nothing ofc, but is hilarious nonetheless).

It does seem strange, I guess. I admire Cassandra's theories because they describe how people get along with each other, which is something I'm interested in (particularly with respect to ESI's), and do so in a manner that I understand.

Cassandra is not an ordinary IEI (if something like this exists); she has a way of presenting information that I can relate to. I feel that her theories are presented logically and dispassionately. They may be true or they may not be true, but they are organized and are placed out there to be examined on their merits. The fact that I can easily relate to them may have to do with the fact that she has a Te-dom father, and I grew up very close to my IEI cousin, and perhaps Cassandra and I both got acclimated to our unusual environments, to the extent that we can now hold a convo without pissing each other off.

With respect to Supervision, I have talked with most of the IEI's presently on this forum, and my feelings of supervising them range from "yep, I'm supervising them" to "Uh, what's supervision?" I don't know what accounts for this.
For the record, there is only one IEI that I think I supervise, and I only feel like supervising them when I'm feeling bad about myself, and I need to stop this because it makes me an asshole. The rest just seem like extremely unique, interesting, and fundamentally nice people.

[Aylen]

Haha, I think he just likes them because he has observed similar things.

What if you are actually duals?

Just teasing you. hahah

p.s. The story that guy told just sounded kind of made up to me. Do you actually trust that it happened or he was just fantasizing? I actually want to know what your impression of his story was if not taken at face value. I think I was kind of following until, "Oh god, yes, bite me you wild stallion, oh yes". And I was like "No, noooo", remark. Just seemed an odd thing to hear someone say outside of a porno or romance novel.

[darya]

This thread is cracking me up. Just wanted to add that Se subs, particularly sx 6w7 can indeed be agro and crazy in bed, but many other ESI's are also prudish and conservative. So...it depends on the ESI.

[Aylen]

It does seem strange, I guess. I admire Cassandra's theories because they describe how people get along with each other, which is something I'm interested in (particularly with respect to ESI's), and do so in a manner that I understand.

Cassandra is not an ordinary IEI (if something like this exists); she has a way of presenting information that I can relate to. I feel that her theories are presented logically and dispassionately. They may be true or they may not be true, but they are organized and are placed out there to be examined on their merits. The fact that I can easily relate to them may have to do with the fact that she has a Te-dom father, and I grew up very close to my IEI cousin, and perhaps Cassandra and I both got acclimated to our unusual environments, to the extent that we can now hold a convo without pissing each other off.

With respect to Supervision, I have talked with most of the IEI's presently on this forum, and my feelings of supervising them range from "yep, I'm supervising them" to "Uh, what's supervision?" I don't know what accounts for this.
For the record, there is only one IEI that I think I supervise, and I only feel like supervising them when I'm feeling bad about myself, and I need to stop this because it makes me an asshole. The rest just seem like extremely unique, interesting, and fundamentally nice people.

I have never felt supervised by you because I feel you tend to be agreeable even when you don't think you are. I am not sure if it is only online or you have a tendency to agree with people and/or just not challenge their perceptions. Sometimes I feel I am hard on you but maybe that is because I don't think you think things through sometimes before you just agree with people. You don't have to believe everything you read... :/

That could also be something you learned to adapt to with age and experience with people. Have you mellowed over time?

[Olimpia]

p.s. The story that guy told just sounded kind of made up to me. Do you actually trust that it happened or he was just fantasizing? I actually want to know what your impression of his story was if not taken at face value. I think I was kind of following until, "Oh god, yes, bite me you wild stallion, oh yes". And I was like "No, noooo", remark. Just seemed an odd thing to hear someone say outside of a porno or romance novel.

The "wild stallion" and "no" parts were only for comedic effect. I mentioned that he wasn't entirely serious.
But yes, I do believe that the general gist of the story – him being with a woman who low-key "forced" him to bite her during sex, and he didn't like doing that, was real.

[darya]

I feel that her theories are presented logically and dispassionately.

That's my impression as well. Maybe it's a German IEI thing

[Adam Strange]

I have never felt supervised by you because I feel you tend to be agreeable even when you don't think you are. I am not sure if it is only online or you have a tendency to agree with people and/or just not challenge their perceptions.

Probably both. Pretending to agree with people just lets me move on quickly to things I care more about. I have no intention of challenging beliefs that don't matter to me. If I challenged every wrong belief that I encounter, I'd have no time for anything else.

Sometimes I feel I am hard on you but maybe that is because I don't think you think things through sometimes before you just agree with people. You don't have to believe everything you read... :/

I'm not offended; I like the attention. And I don't believe everything I read.

That could also be something you learned to adapt to with age and experience with people. Have you mellowed over time?

You mean, why am I different from Narc or Totalize? Age and Experience. I'm not fighting for a foothold anymore. Instead, I'm trying to iron out some of the speed bumps which are keeping me from doing exactly what I want. Most of them are described in Strat's LIE-ESI duality article.

[Persephone]

This thread is cracking me up. Just wanted to add that Se subs, particularly sx 6w7 can indeed be agro and crazy in bed, but many other ESI's are also prudish and conservative. So...it depends on the ESI.

Fwiw now that I am an ESI I don't relate at all to the aggressor behaviour described above, must be my 2Fi that tricks my brain into the victim style.

[Olimpia]

Fwiw now that I am an ESI I don't relate at all to the aggressor behaviour described above, must be my 2Fi that tricks my brain into the victim style.

And being a female Type 4, duh.

[darya]

Fwiw now that I am an ESI I don't relate at all to the aggressor behaviour described above, must be my 2Fi that tricks my brain into the victim style.

Since I'm a mean gamma agressor too, and I relate to victim describtions perfectly, I'll take the precise position of ESI-1Fi, cause you seem a tiiiiny bit more Fi than me, gamma sister.

[Persephone]

And being a female Type 4, duh.

Sure. Excuse me if I find your typing methods awkward and inconsistent. You pick a random interaction, phrase or information and type out of your impressions, likes or dislikes without considering a bigger picture. Talking about relationships, attraction and attractiveness is Fi for you but have you considered instincts in the game? Snarky comments are Se creative apparently but how being totally naive is not Ne valuing? So I guess I will rather rely on my self understanding and opinions I received from Russian socionists as Gulenko or Meged.

[Chae]

To go about the trickiness of this, can we have more perspectives of someone who values ? Would be interesting to see how they perceive the erotic attitudes of It will also help to answer the question why an ESI does not exactly match the caregiving style

/summons @Subteigh

[Suzaku]

Power games? The fck? Okay so there could be some sort of power play between "I need you" because "I chose you" and that could be reversed as well depending on the day. But it falls down to dynamics. What was agreed on for sexual needs is what is important. But from my understanding LIE are hard workers and might not immediately pick up on emotional needs. ESI thinks it is hot (subjective thought) that the LIE busts his or her butt off all day and wants to help them unwind because they chose one another. They just want to make the LIE feel good is all. That's what I get from it.

[Olimpia]

Power games? The fck? Okay so there could be some sort of power play between "I need you" because "I chose you" and that could be reversed as well depending on the day. But it falls down to dynamics. What was agreed on for sexual needs is what is important. But from my understanding LIE are hard workers and might not immediately pick up on emotional needs. ESI thinks it is hot (subjective thought) that the LIE busts his or her butt off all day and wants to help them unwind because they chose one another. They just want to make the LIE feel good is all. That's what I get from it.

Yeah, that is the Te-Fi part of the relationship. So, this dynamic also applies to LSE and EII Duality.
But this doesn't explain the Se-Ni side of it (or the Ne-Si side, for that matter).

This reminds me of an EII-LIE interaction.
LIE: holy shit i have so much work to do
EII: "holy shit i have so much work to do" i'm turned on

[Suzaku]

Another thing I'm picking up from what I read is if the two are devoted, is they want to keep consistent with their sexual synergy. Because they don't want to neglect one another's needs. They want to understand what makes one another tic and keep their mates happy. Some mates can fall in to an analysis paralysis approach to sex because they want to please so bad but then get performance anxiety. So maybe the ESI wants them to know it's okay and have at it :3

But I'm not sure you can really type someone's sex drives. Especially in meat space.

And I know, I know, what I type may be utter bullshit, I still haven't met an LIE in-person. I'd like to though.