Despite popular socionics opinion, philosophically power is a concept too broad to be limited to Se. IMO.Originally Posted by Lord Pixel
Despite popular socionics opinion, philosophically power is a concept too broad to be limited to Se. IMO.
~* astralsilky
Si Fe Xi = SEI-Si ISFP THE AESTHETE
MBTI & Socionics Questionnaires INXX
Intertype Relations Type SEI-Si
Lytov Filatova Portrait Type SEI
(Gulenko Portrait Type SEE, also XSFX)
MBTI since 1990
Socionics since 2000
4w5 that morphed into a 3w2 sx/sp
Yea...completely beyond is correct. I do appreciate the effort to make it less beyond though, but I don't think Si will be able to relate much, that will usually always sound like the desire to inflict pain. Just to Si, there is no way that pain makes sense as pleasure, pain is pain and pleasure is pleasure. Very fixed sensations.
Perhaps Ni is so not presently focused that Se sensation brings them back to now in a way that feels exhilarating and alive like you say, makes you feel present and grounded and in touch with your body? Ah, I cannot explain it, I'll just take your word for it.
It definitely has a confusing and uncomfortable vibe when being communicated to some Si users though, but I've heard the other side say all the sentimental caressing stuff feels fake or like "Oprah" lol, if that's the case then I can understand the lack of appeal of the other view.
I don't mean as a whole concept, but in socionics Se aware of things like about physical force and power dynamics is it not?
Is Te about data force, Fe about emotional force and Ne about conceptual force? I think it is about field more. Awareness of force and power is too broad a concept to limit to Se in my opinion, even though I know its socionics attribution to Se has grown common among many.
Last edited by vesstheastralsilky; 12-01-2018 at 11:37 PM.
~* astralsilky
Si Fe Xi = SEI-Si ISFP THE AESTHETE
MBTI & Socionics Questionnaires INXX
Intertype Relations Type SEI-Si
Lytov Filatova Portrait Type SEI
(Gulenko Portrait Type SEE, also XSFX)
MBTI since 1990
Socionics since 2000
4w5 that morphed into a 3w2 sx/sp
.....
Lol!!!
~* astralsilky
Si Fe Xi = SEI-Si ISFP THE AESTHETE
MBTI & Socionics Questionnaires INXX
Intertype Relations Type SEI-Si
Lytov Filatova Portrait Type SEI
(Gulenko Portrait Type SEE, also XSFX)
MBTI since 1990
Socionics since 2000
4w5 that morphed into a 3w2 sx/sp
Myself, ENTj (male)- No interest in being a victim or extreme bondage, seems somewhat 'too much' IMO as in the whole setting up removes the spontaneous and wild aspect of sex.
ENTj or ESTj friend (male)- Very straight-laced and traditional in regards to sex, not much creativity or interest. Joined the military.
ENTj-Ni friend (male)- Seems somewhat like a victim. Definitely the submissive one romantically. Studying graphic design.
ENTj friend (female)- Domineering and assertive, does not like being a victim. Studying secondary education
INTp friend (male)- Loves being victimized, a quote from my good friend: "I really need a girl that will just tase me and try to cut me. That's so hot." Studying corporate law.
INTp friend (male)- Very insecure and submissive in regards to relationships. I would not be surprised if he participated in BDSM. A genius in mathematics.
INTp friend (female)- Was very promiscuous and refused to enter a committed relationship. Loved being victimized by confident, and often lesser intelligent guys. Studying art history at Cornell.
BDSM = yikes for me. 🤭 Repellant.
Tell me this is not victim romance style in a nutshell. I don't think it works for Louis CK because he's probably not in the Gamma or Beta quadra.
That level of submission is a bit much TBH. The Victim likes being the center of the aggressor's attention yeah, but to go full on gimp slave is a bit much. Also, as an ILI I can tell you I'd never become a "gimp" unless a dump truck full of money was involved. I'll take that hit in order to instantly attain "fuck you" money and then some.
To those not fully in the know the average ILI is so stereotypically keen on being the "unseen" power that it earned them the nickname of the "mastermind" in most other circles. I mean hell, If you're into BDSM you'll eventually run into some variation of this saying: "The Sub is who's really in control."
For those with innocent ears from the outside looking in this sounds absolutely absurd. I mean, the sub's doing everything the dom is literally telling them to with an enthusiastic smile with body language to match! Ah, but that's the thing. See, both sides really want to please the other in the end. The Sub is sending subtle hints in the hopes that the Dom "gets it" and gives the orders they hope they're about to give them. When they do? Happiness. Finally, someone who understands how this all is supposed to work. A worthy master at long fucking last. I can finally commit myself...
Of course, the assumption is that this works both ways and that as we think we've found a worthy master our new master has finally found a competent servant worthy of getting fully invested in. Finally, someone who can "keep up" and all that. A most perfect servant, how lucky am I to have finally found this one? Perhaps there really is a god...
Hope ya catch the general drift...
I'm still only getting used to this typing, so take my opinion with a grain of salt, or what have you.
I don't enjoy BDSM. It always feels to me like taking on a role of a dom or sub. I don't enjoy inflicting pain on someone and I don't enjoy pain in any capacity. I don't need a power dynamic to sustain a relationship either. Am I open to taking up BDSM elements? Of course. I'm protective of my partner and I aim to please.
I enjoy emotions both good and bad. I like drama and tension in a relationship, and with my partner's consent, I would manufacture such situations. This is not really a necessity to me though and I do vanilla just fine. I do enjoy feeling a sense of awe of my partner. I date someone because they are the absolute best. If there is any dynamic I do enjoy, it's putting my partner on a pedestal and neglecting my needs to serve them. I like having someone who is hot and cold, a bit hard to read.
I don't necessarily think BDSM is to do with quadras, since I am familiar with other quadra individuals who have expressed an interest in BDSM.
Regarding romantic fantasies, I think of it this way: I'm dating someone because they're the best person I know, so I suppose, I want them to be desirable to others in certain capacity. I'm aware certain feelings of jealousy come from that, but that's okay. I do have a lot of romantic fantasies centering around myself and my partner. I can get into different head spaces and feel different ways. I don't want to go into too much detail here, but I have been described as somewhat of a pervert by past lovers. But at the same time, the sex in itself is vanilla.
@Xaiviay I don't relate to Ayn Rand's romantic style either... Maybe it's not type related but I don't think she espouses Gamma Ideals at all... for example, in the Fountainhead, Howard Roark, the protagonist rapes Dominique and she somehow writes it out to be an okay thing. While I understand the reasoning for it, I don't think most people would be okay with the idea of rape, regardless of quadra... Her views are a bit extreme to be honest... she comes off more as a Beta ST than a Gamma NT, but yeah, I don't think it's type related.
100% real SLI. Do not question.
<<Under construction >>
What if she never liked it? I mean, why she would liked it necessarily at some point?
She would not necessarily like it at some point. It was just my fantasy, and you get whatever you want in a fantasy.
I get what Adam is saying. But I think, in his fantasy, she's interested in him in the first place. I have some pretty intense fantasies too, but in my head, the partner is always into it. If they weren't, it wouldn't turn me on at all. Which is why he probably would never do it IRL. Like it's a fantasy, but it's very controlled, if you get what I mean.
100% real SLI. Do not question.
<<Under construction >>
I was going to talk about psychology, but now I think it would be a waste of time. I just understood that LIEs don't want/care to listen and even perceive as an offense when someone tries to expand the scopes. Thats just for Ne and Si types I guess.
Yeah, we're pretty dumb.
My sex impulse have never got me to fantasize about hurting someone I like. I've just fantasized about hurting ppl I've been truly angry at. I wonder why so many males fantasize about sexually offending females they like. Some have acted on that fantasies and impulse sadly. Most don't. In some cases they fantasize about the female enjoying it. I wonder if elements are related to it in any way.
@BOT, to answer your question, inject yourself with 20X your present blood level of Testosterone and call an IEE in the morning.
FWIW, I've never fantasized about hurting someone. Killing them, yes, but never being mean or harmful just for the hell of it.
Last edited by Adam Strange; 12-07-2018 at 04:49 AM.
I don't think you are an idiot. But I feel like you often take a defensive attitude when I comment things you say or do, as if it were always a personal criticism. If I were to criticize you, I'd just do it blatantly as I've done before with you and others. Anyway, to me LIEs get defensive or pig headed often when I try to talk to them in a mildly serious tone, especially if its related to something they think or do. I genuinely feel like LIEs don't care to listen to my observations because my curiosity born in 1DNe and Si issues, which they just don't value.
I talk to you because this is a forum, then I don't dislike you and I usually can have easier communication with males (I can even take some liberties, where a regular female would feel offended a male is likely to laugh or shrug).
About your ex, I can talk for myself, I don't share my opinions unless I think they are going to be well received and valued. If I feel ppl is going to brush me away when speaking or quickly discredit my thoughts I just saw it as a waste of time and effort. Once in a while I communicate my thoughts angrily to some. Once a year or so.
I'm usually just chatty with few ppl irl.
You are lucky this is a forum and we don't know each other personally, lol
Otherwise I may not be talking to you.
Well, I'm glad you are talking to me.I don't think you are an idiot. But I feel like you often take a defensive attitude when I comment things you say or do, as if it were always a personal criticism. If I were to criticize you, I'd just do it blatantly as I've done before with you and others. Anyway, to me LIEs get defensive or pig headed often when I try to talk to them in a mildly serious tone, especially if its related to something they think or do. I genuinely feel like LIEs don't care to listen to my observations because my curiosity born in 1DNe and Si issues, which they just don't value.
I talk to you because this is a forum, then I don't dislike you and I usually can have easier communication with males (I can even take some liberties, where a regular female would feel offended a male is likely to laugh or shrug).
About your ex, I can talk for myself, I don't share my opinions unless I think they are going to be well received and valued. If I feel ppl is going to brush me away when speaking or quickly discredit my thoughts I just saw it as a waste of time and effort. Once in a while I communicate my thoughts angrily to some. Once a year or so.
I'm usually just chatty with few ppl irl.
You are lucky this is a forum and we don't know each other personally, lol
Otherwise I may not be talking to you.
I actually appreciate your viewpoints.
In any case, our interactions might have a bit of Supervisor-Supervisee in them.
yes I thought about testosterone too. But do those fantasies can be truly related to it? I mean, most males have them at some point?
In my dictionary forced sex and noncon sex is harm.
My comment was unrelated to yours so no prob. (:
That's definitely...not...what I read. If that really is the case, I would like my post to be considered by itself, without that context. I was just commenting on D/s in general...
(No judgment, but S&M is not my thing, as far as I can tell).
Yes, they do. Even women who transition to men with testosterone injections start having those fantasies. Coincidence?
Well, mine too.
Criminality isn't a matter of having bad thoughts. It is a matter of doing bad things.
Do you have a link?
Yeah, but crimes were bad thoughts at first, tho.Criminality isn't a matter of having bad thoughts. It is a matter of doing bad things.
No link right at hand.
The very definition of a criminal is a person who follows their wants wherever they go.
Small children also do this.
It's definitely not just a male thing.
In your dictionary, maybe. Not in mine. I have had non con fantasies, and I don't judge myself for having them. I'm a woman and I am attracted to both genders. I think it's important to draw the line between fantasy and reality. I wouldn't actually do it to a person in real, but I understand that would actually be wrong. My mind can go to really dark places but I don't think that's a bad thing. It's the source of my artistic expression, that I can be dark and feel dark things.
For the purpose of this thread, I would like to make a clear distinction between this and BDSM... I wouldn't connect these fantasies with BDSM. The thing is, I have no interest in acting out any of my fantasies, even in a controlled setting. I don't want to try non con or harmful sex, even with all the safe words and everything. That would be like trying to bring the dark reaches of my soul out into the real world and see its real world manifestation. That would frighten me so much.
I don't really know how to explain it beyond that. I guess what I'm trying to say is, I love playing with emotions and creating scenarios in my head where I can experience and experiment with them. It enhances the quality of my life. But that doesn't mean I want to take them on in the real world...
This is why I'm different from people who actually commit violence to others. Because I'm not thinking about actually doing it, if it makes any sense at all.
100% real SLI. Do not question.
<<Under construction >>
No offence, but are you advocating for thought policing here?
100% real SLI. Do not question.
<<Under construction >>
Little delinquents.
When you say "police" you are referring to an external individual who punish someone by his/her thoughts. I dont consider me saying that there exist bad and good thoughts and asking the roots of sexual crime fantasies in males an advocacy for anything. Thats to assume a lot. I don't advocate for humans limiting the free will of others which is against human rights unless there is a crime.
I guess
In your dictionary, maybe. Not in mine. I have had non con fantasies, and I don't judge myself for having them. I'm a woman and I am attracted to both genders. I think it's important to draw the line between fantasy and reality. I wouldn't actually do it to a person in real, but I understand that would actually be wrong. My mind can go to really dark places but I don't think that's a bad thing. It's the source of my artistic expression, that I can be dark and feel dark things.
For the purpose of this thread, I would like to make a clear distinction between this and BDSM... I wouldn't connect these fantasies with BDSM. The thing is, I have no interest in acting out any of my fantasies, even in a controlled setting. I don't want to try non con or harmful sex, even with all the safe words and everything. That would be like trying to bring the dark reaches of my soul out into the real world and see its real world manifestation. That would frighten me so much.
I don't really know how to explain it beyond that. I guess what I'm trying to say is, I love playing with emotions and creating scenarios in my head where I can experience and experiment with them. It enhances the quality of my life. But that doesn't mean I want to take them on in the real world...
This is why I'm different from people who actually commit violence to others. Because I'm not thinking about actually doing it, if it makes any sense at all.
Yeah well., I just wanted to clarify that, since that's where my mind went. No problems
100% real SLI. Do not question.
<<Under construction >>
You thought right. Some people want to be tied, forced, and/or hurt... in the moment they choose, by who they choose, under the conditions they choose... It's a delicate subject that is easy to missinterprete, because wording, because it's on the taboo side, and how it can imitate a sexual agression in a specific setting for the pleasure of every party involved.
It requires a shit ton of communication.
I think most males have fantasies about random women they see around, indipendently of their consent - but I think women have some fantasies too, especially at the beach or some place where naked bodies are exposed?
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
that sounds more like So instinct mb.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
Seeing potential in individuals you don't know is So instinct? I would have thought that'd be Sx instinct. Maybe it's because I don't feel satisfied in my current (lack of) relationships, but my eyes are always looking for people.
I'm one of the least socially oriented people out there yet I still treat new people much better than some social people do, if only because I love the concept of starting things without finishing them- maybe this is a male trait lol.
Or maybe I grew up in an environment where people just come and go, and one person isn't that much more interesting than any other person. Which leads to my need to find a person who IS more interesting than any other person.
Oh lol, makes sense.
I was thinking about fantasizing about (naked or not) individuals in public. A whole group of naked people is not something I'd like to be a part of.
Being horny has a social instinct?
100% real SLI. Do not question.
<<Under construction >>
Hm I'd say that the SX instinct tends to have the tendency towards exhibitionism as a whole, and oddly enough, I've found a lot more Sx/Sp individuals being exhibitionistic in the stereotypical sense of showcasing their body in a manner that is supposed to "draw in" people, more so than with Sx/So (this stacking is often more "intellectualized" and out of touch with their physicality to an extent, it seems like most Sx/So individuals are Intuitive, at least in my experience... but you can also describe it as the Social sphere itself being more "abstract" than SP (even if led by Sensing), whereas Self-pres is inherently more physical.) But of course both can go there.
Voyeurism strikes me as a rather Sp/Sx. Definitely counterflow, "underbelly", "the secret gaze" etc
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
