Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 60

Thread: Erotic Attitudes: the line between "Aggressor" and "Victim"

  1. #1
    mustachio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    stoppage time
    Posts
    896
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Erotic Attitudes: the line between "Aggressor" and "Victim"

    supposedly i'm ESTp. still, i have some difficulty relating to the Aggressor attitude. i relate more to the Victim attitude. is this possible? is there a fine line between Aggressor and Victim which could cause somebody to mistake one for the other?
    IEI - the nasty kind...

  2. #2
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Introversion/Extroversion can confuse matters because the extrovert is often the one who initiates relationships. Other than that, I think the line between aggressor and victim is much more skewed in Gamma than it is in Beta, from my observations and understanding of Beta duality.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  3. #3
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Just like everything else in socionics, it's apparent in some people and not in others. Some people fit cleanly into one of the four slots. For some people it's only apparent that they're Ni/Se or Ne/Si. For some people they don't seem to fit into any, and some seem to fit into all of them.

    For me, it's helpful in understanding why some partners have been boring or overbearing to me (Ne/Si). It also helps me understand why in spite of many mutual attractions to Ni types, I have not ever actually done anything with any of them. *shrugs* If one of the attitudes makes sense for you, use it when it applies to a situation you're in. If not, don't. And be careful to avoid over-analysis.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  4. #4
    Blaze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,725
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    i'm not 100% with the erotic attitudes. they seem kinda limited. supposedly i'm infantile but you know what sometimes i'm very forceful and aggressive and sometimes i want the aggression forced on me. i can be careful, i can be master, i can be slave, geisha, yo mamma, little girl, bitch, slut whateva. sex games are sex games.

    ILE

    those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often

  5. #5
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    it's not about sex games
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  6. #6
    Blaze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,725
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    it's not about sex games
    i think it kinda is. otherwise we'd all be playing the same erotic attitude tape all the time, and i know i don't do this. the way people are sexually changes all the time. people need variety, and don't want to get stuck in a routine. when you're in too much of a routine, that's when the sex starts to get like mad wood.

    ILE

    those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often

  7. #7
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    That's why I don't think it's about sex games... more like how people hook up or the roles they play in the relationship. Perhaps they should be called "romantic attitudes" instead of "erotic attitudes"?
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  8. #8
    Blaze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,725
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    maybe. i think the whole concept of erotic attitudes needs a lot of refinement and further articulation. they're really vague, infantile is not a good descriptor, careful is not a great descriptor, victim-aggressor is polarized, etc etc etc. it would make more sense to ask known types what gets them going and then at least see if there are correlations.

    ILE

    those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often

  9. #9
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Again though, I don't think it's sexual. It's not about sex itself, but about intimate relationships.

    Ne types are "child-like" simply because of their Ne, and this "child-like" quality is a matter of how they generally behave. Inside a relationship with a Si type, they are cared for by that Si type. The Si type is attracted to their child-like wonder and perspective, and they like that the Ne type appreciates that they care for their comfort and health and depend on them to do so. (damn pronouns)

    With Ni/Se types it's more about challenge.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  10. #10
    Blaze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,725
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    if the erotic attitudes are not sexual then why are they called erotic? again, i think what "gets people", cause that's what we're talkin about, needs to be better defined. personally the victim agressor dichotomy is easier to understand because the media plays it out again and again. the careful infantile one is not well defined at all. and we don't usually see it in the media, at least not that i can think of.

    i spose Ne can be "child-like" or naive. hopefully by the time you're 40, you've learned something about the world, though, and are not so childlike and naive anymore. i had great "erotic attraction" with an "aggressor" for years....and all the other erotic types, too at different times. and the "careful" one doesn't stand out any more than any of the others.

    eroticism is what you make of it. you are right it is about intimacy and communication as well as sexual variety and "games". i just think they're trying to analyze and dichotomize a very complex, inherently not-well-understood process, which also has spiritual components and evolutionary reproductive components.

    ILE

    those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often

  11. #11
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by diamond8
    if the erotic attitudes are not sexual then why are they called erotic? again, i think what "gets people", cause that's what we're talkin about, needs to be better defined. personally the victim agressor dichotomy is easier to understand because the media plays it out again and again. the careful infantile one is not well defined at all. and we don't usually see it in the media, at least not that i can think of.

    i spose Ne can be "child-like" or naive. hopefully by the time you're 40, you've learned something about the world, though, and are not so childlike and naive anymore. i had great "erotic attraction" with an "aggressor" for years....and all the other erotic types, too at different times. and the "careful" one doesn't stand out any more than any of the others.

    eroticism is what you make of it. you are right it is about intimacy and communication as well as sexual variety and "games". i just think they're trying to analyze and dichotomize a very complex, inherently not-well-understood process, which also has spiritual components and evolutionary reproductive components.
    I think it is good for extremes. Like extreme Se with extreme Ni will look very aggressor victim, and same with extreme Ne and extreme Si. But when it's blurred, the things aren't so distinguishable.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  12. #12
    Don't forget the the thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    6,626
    Mentioned
    159 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by diamond8
    if the erotic attitudes are not sexual then why are they called erotic? again, i think what "gets people", cause that's what we're talkin about, needs to be better defined. personally the victim agressor dichotomy is easier to understand because the media plays it out again and again. the careful infantile one is not well defined at all. and we don't usually see it in the media, at least not that i can think of.
    Mm, I suppose that victim-aggressor is more obvious, but there are definitely examples of caregiver-infantile. The movie The Girl Next Door is a good example.

  13. #13

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    78
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by diamond8
    if the erotic attitudes are not sexual then why are they called erotic?

    It's because of a crappy machine translation from Russian to English. For instance, take the 'erotic' type careful.


    Are they called that because they're careful in the English-speaking sense of the word? Do they tiptoe around and watch out so they don't knock that vase over? No, they prefer to care for others, hence the careful. A more appropriate term in English would be caring, but machine translators have trouble making those sorts of distinctions when it comes to connotations/denotations.


    For instance, read the ISTp description. Pay close attention to the "Princess on a pea" statement. It took me forever to figure out WTF that meant, thinking it was some sort of DaVinci cypher Socionics codex BS, until with the help of others on this forum I realized it was just a crappy machine translation referencing an old fairy tale.


    To get back on track, the term 'erotic attitude' was probably mis-translated, and 'romantic attitude' is probably closer to the truth of what the original theorist was getting at.
    ; 5w6

  14. #14
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG
    I think it is good for extremes. Like extreme Se with extreme Ni will look very aggressor victim, and same with extreme Ne and extreme Si. But when it's blurred, the things aren't so distinguishable.
    I agree with this, and with what Joy said, too. Subtypes can blur the Gulenko groups considerably.


    Quote Originally Posted by diamond8
    cause that's what we're talkin about, needs to be better defined. personally the victim agressor dichotomy is easier to understand because the media plays it out again and again. the careful infantile one is not well defined at all. and we don't usually see it in the media, at least not that i can think of.
    I agree, the "typical male courtship behavior" in the media seems to be Aggressive - at least how men are "supposed" to be.

    Examples of Caregiver-Infantile in the media:

    Perhaps --

    the Mary Jane - Peter Parker interaction in the Spider-Man movies
    Dharma and Greg
    Jeannie and Tony in I dream of Jeannie
    Mary and Dick in 3rd Rock from the Sun
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  15. #15
    aka Slacker Slacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    North Korea
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    8,819
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think any movie with Spencer Tracy and Katherine Hepburn has a bit of the caregiver/infantile vibe too.
    It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.
    -Mark Twain


    You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.

  16. #16
    Blaze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,725
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I STILL DON'T LIKE THE WORD INFANTILE.

    heh.

    ILE

    those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often

  17. #17
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I don't like the word "victim" either... there are a lot of terms in socionics that are poorly chosen, such as "obstinant" and "logical" and many others.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  18. #18
    aka Slacker Slacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    North Korea
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    8,819
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    One of the weaknesses of Socionics, well in the English-speaking word at least, is that these translations can be clumsy and the words used are often loaded with all sorts of baggage. It also makes people sometimes mistype themselves and others, I think, because they don't want to see themselves as "negative" or "infantile" or "irrational" or "aristocratic" or whatever.
    It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.
    -Mark Twain


    You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.

  19. #19
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yep. I think "Obstinant" and "Compliant" are the two worst terms for the bunch, *very* misleading.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  20. #20
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Slacker Mom
    One of the weaknesses of Socionics, well in the English-speaking word at least, is that these translations can be clumsy and the words used are often loaded with all sorts of baggage. It also makes people sometimes mistype themselves and others, I think, because they don't want to see themselves as "negative" or "infantile" or "irrational" or "aristocratic" or whatever.
    Definitely -- or not being "Resolute" or even being seen as "Introverted". But there is no way to have terms that will please everyone.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  21. #21
    Don't forget the the thehotelambush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    6,626
    Mentioned
    159 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Terminology--meh. It's mostly a problem for non-serious socionists.

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    Examples of Caregiver-Infantile in the media:

    Perhaps --

    the Mary Jane - Peter Parker interaction in the Spider-Man movies
    Dharma and Greg
    Jeannie and Tony in I dream of Jeannie
    Mary and Dick in 3rd Rock from the Sun
    Thanks Expat, those are good examples.

    Let's see if I can think of some more...

    Hank and Peggy in King of the Hill
    The King and Anna in The King and I
    Deb and Napoleon in Napoleon Dynamite


    On an unrelated note, I have just been subjected to (i.e. watched) Marie Antoinette--a good example of a Caregiver/Victim relationship not working out.

  22. #22
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Another example (not very detailed) of Caregiver-Infantile in the media --

    MacLeod (Christophe Lambert) and his wife in the original Highlander movie
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  23. #23
    misutii's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    1,234
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    omg i think just thought of a very good way to interpret the whole Erotic Attitude thing...... I want you guys to test it out, it only takes a second and it's fun

    a) think about sex
    b) now think about people you've had sex with
    c) now think about the sexual encounters that you've found comparably dissatisfying

    ok it's a simple fact that a person usually blames the other person involved when the sex just isn't that great (maybe we don't do it out loud, but we do it in our heads) so now channel these criticisms into Gulenko's erotic attitudes.

    So to address the fact that i've noticed that people whose types are in the "Infantile" category react in the most defensive manner to these attitudes, I find that reaction to be infantile, lol, of course you wouldn't define your own behaviour as infantile! duh, but i bet someone that didn't enjoy having sex with you would (i.e. me)

    I find that it's difficult to actually talk about sex in social situations. This because the people that bring the subject up don't actually want to talk about it, they just want attention. Thus the conversation never actually penetrates deeper than the surface because if it did people would get uncomfortable as they'd be forced to accept the reality of their situation (that their sex life is lacking).

    Anyways i'm interested to hear if this little method works for others....
    INFp-Ni

  24. #24
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    No.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  25. #25
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It's about the interactions between lovers, not the sex itself.
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  26. #26
    misutii's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    1,234
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    It's about the interactions between lovers, not the sex itself.
    you're not making any sense. Sex itself REQUIRES interactions between lovers. stop arguing about the semantics of it. You see humans are interacting with each other before, during, and after sex. wow you learn something every day. if you'd prefer that i not be a condescending prick then instead of replying to my post with a stupid insulting one-liner ACTUALLY think about what I'm trying to say or don't reply at all.
    INFp-Ni

  27. #27
    Khamelion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    U.S.
    TIM
    SEE-Fi 6w7 sx/so
    Posts
    3,828
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by misutii
    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    It's about the interactions between lovers, not the sex itself.
    you're not making any sense. Sex itself REQUIRES interactions between lovers. stop arguing about the semantics of it. You see humans are interacting with each other before, during, and after sex. wow you learn something every day. if you'd prefer that i not be a condescending prick then instead of replying to my post with a stupid insulting one-liner ACTUALLY think about what I'm trying to say or don't reply at all.

    Well yeah...the whole thing is like one big interaction, sex itself is one slice of it. But there are a lot of other slices that stem off of sex, along with slices that have to do with actual sex such as emotional connections seperate from sexual impulses. They do exisist. imho of course
    SEE Unknown Subtype
    6w7 sx/so



    [21:29] hitta: idealism is just the gap between the thought of death
    [21:29] hitta: and not dying
    .

  28. #28
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by misutii
    omg i think just thought of a very good way to interpret the whole Erotic Attitude thing...... I want you guys to test it out, it only takes a second and it's fun

    a) think about sex
    b) now think about people you've had sex with
    c) now think about the sexual encounters that you've found comparably dissatisfying

    ok it's a simple fact that a person usually blames the other person involved when the sex just isn't that great (maybe we don't do it out loud, but we do it in our heads) so now channel these criticisms into Gulenko's erotic attitudes.

    So to address the fact that i've noticed that people whose types are in the "Infantile" category react in the most defensive manner to these attitudes, I find that reaction to be infantile, lol, of course you wouldn't define your own behaviour as infantile! duh, but i bet someone that didn't enjoy having sex with you would (i.e. me)

    I find that it's difficult to actually talk about sex in social situations. This because the people that bring the subject up don't actually want to talk about it, they just want attention. Thus the conversation never actually penetrates deeper than the surface because if it did people would get uncomfortable as they'd be forced to accept the reality of their situation (that their sex life is lacking).

    Anyways i'm interested to hear if this little method works for others....
    Okay...

    1.) My experiences have not shown this theory to be accurate.

    2.) Whether or not the sex is good, or how good it is, is about a lot of other types of compatibility than just socionics.

    3.) How someone reacts if his/her partner did not enjoy his or herself is a far more individual thing than socionics types or erotic attitudes. Also, being someone who tells another person that the sex "could have been better" or something like that shows a lot of immaturity. You cannot tell someone that you didn't enjoy the sex and then call them childish for not taking it very well. I do not think this type of immaturity can be blamed on erotic attitudes.

    4.) The "erotic attitudes" are, imo, about romantic relationships, not sex itself. Si/Ne types can be into SMBD, for example. And the erotic attitudes apply just as much to romantic relationships when the partners have not had sex as they do to those who have. If you try to translate the erotic attitudes into sex and try to apply them to sexual acts, you're going to have an inaccurate picture of what Aggressor/Victim and Infatile/Caregiver relationships are about. (Not that I'm saying that you're saying that if someone likes to be tied up it automatically makes them Ni or something.)
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  29. #29
    Blaze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,725
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    yeah but sex is a primeval, yet complex and advanced phenomenon.

    i've said before...sex has spiritual, evolutionary, procreative, love, and activity meanings and functions. it is so incredibly complex and meaningful on so many levels.

    i don't think it can just be boiled down to these black and white dichotomies.

    in a way, sex is the epitome or natural extension of a partner relationship, sort of like an icon.

    ILE

    those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often

  30. #30
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by misutii
    ok it's a simple fact that a person usually blames the other person involved when the sex just isn't that great (maybe we don't do it out loud, but we do it in our heads) so now channel these criticisms into Gulenko's erotic attitudes.
    I really think you should re-think this "simple fact". It is obviously true for you, and for other people, but not for everybody.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  31. #31
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    agreed
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  32. #32
    reyn_til_runa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    new jersey
    Posts
    1,009
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    Quote Originally Posted by misutii
    ok it's a simple fact that a person usually blames the other person involved when the sex just isn't that great (maybe we don't do it out loud, but we do it in our heads) so now channel these criticisms into Gulenko's erotic attitudes.
    I really think you should re-think this "simple fact". It is obviously true for you, and for other people, but not for everybody.
    I have always blamed myself first followed by any external/internal conditions possibly influencing the sex. Usually if I blame myself it lingers a bit painfully just until I come up with something like "That was a REALLY small piece of plywood we were on...." Immediately, the bad sex is discounted and I feel better.

    There seem to be limitless possibilities, and I'd always rather blame even the most remote conditional influence over a person.
    whenever the dog and i see each other we both stop where we are. we regard each other with a mixture of sadness and suspicion and then we feign indifference.

    Jerry, The Zoo Story by Edward Albee

  33. #33
    meatburger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    A Quazar named Northern Territory
    Posts
    2,570
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Sex attitudes:

    Aggressor: "you will submit to my will or i will destroy you"
    Infantile: "Is that your breast/wirry?" "yes..." "may i touch it?" "yes!" " oh my god i touched it can i touch it again?" ""
    Victim: "Spank me till my buttocks are raw!"
    Careful: "No thats too much Skin. I will show you the bottom of my ankle. This was hot in the olden days you know?"
    ENFp (Unsure of Subtype)

    "And the day came when the risk it took to remain closed in a bud became more painful than the risk it took to blossom." - Anaïs Nin

  34. #34
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Am I correct in assuming that these descriptions are only intended to be humorous?
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  35. #35
    meatburger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    A Quazar named Northern Territory
    Posts
    2,570
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    Am I correct in assuming that these descriptions are only intended to be humorous?
    yesh

    ENFp (Unsure of Subtype)

    "And the day came when the risk it took to remain closed in a bud became more painful than the risk it took to blossom." - Anaïs Nin

  36. #36
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    thought so
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  37. #37
    misutii's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    1,234
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Expat
    Quote Originally Posted by misutii
    ok it's a simple fact that a person usually blames the other person involved when the sex just isn't that great (maybe we don't do it out loud, but we do it in our heads) so now channel these criticisms into Gulenko's erotic attitudes.
    I really think you should re-think this "simple fact". It is obviously true for you, and for other people, but not for everybody.
    this has nothing to do with personal morality, but i must say your response does have "victim" attached to it. The purpose was to provoke people into thinking in a different way... while it didn't completely work I definitely got your attention. I think most of you interpreted what I was attempting to get to in the wrong way... I am not talking about sex in the terms of one night of sex or merely the act of it, but rather a person's general approach to it and how you react to that person's approach, especially over time. furthermore by "blame" i don't mean judgment of the person's essence, but of certain traits/habits/turn-ons/turn-offs. I think you think that when I said "blame" i meant to judge another as INHERENTLY inadequate and I resent that. I brought up this topic because it effects everyone. Finding another person with compatible sexual attitudes is important. sex isn't just a "bedroom" thing. Take into consideration the modern divorce rates and the effect divorce has on children. I've noticed lots of people think of sex as separate from everything else but I've never heard of any study that supported that belief. If a person is uncomfortable with their s/o in bed then, more often than not, that discomfort will extend into other aspects of the relationship. Being able to be yourself is integral to a person's health. Indeed that's what socionics and inter-type relations are there to prove. So yes, cultural and developmental factors definitely play a role in sex, they also definitely play a role in duality... maybe I'm just over-using my Ni right now but I don't understand how sex and socionics should be viewed as completely separate topics.

    Anyways as I said this a difficult topic to tackle as it is going to naturally make lots of people react defensively. It's not something we really learn in school but through personal life experiences. The subject has a sort of societal taboo that's difficult to break. It's kind of like how some people define marriage as "compromise" or "sacrifice" (these kinds of people tend to be stuck in unfulfilling relationships but so is the majority of the population that has a relationship, and so such mistruths are perpetuated).

    People need to be aware of the fact that despite all of the individualistic crap that our culture spouts (i.e. you can do anything you set your mind to / you are responsible for everything in your life) we have to remember that these concepts of "individual freedom" and "responsibility" are merely social constructs. They're rather recent and they're mostly confined to modern western culture. It's for this same reason that mbti's personality portraits are PC bullshit.

    Here's a quote from Lytov's "Introduction to Socionics":

    "According to Marx, economy was the basis of everything – including human relations. Augusta studied happy and unhappy marriages, and initially she relied upon Marx – she studied economic, social and cultural factors that took place in these families. However, she quickly realized that they were not enough. There were families, quite “normal” from the viewpoint of economic situation, cultural level etc., but unhappy anyway.
    What was the reason of their unhappiness? Maybe sex? Augusta was not too shy in these matters (later she even published some articles on sexology)"

    Thus I know many of you are quick to dismiss this concept of "erotic attitudes" but western bias should be taken into consideration when you do so. In my opinion it's not an issue of "IF" sex plays a role in type relations, but "HOW". Just because Gulenko's particular framework doesn't suit you it doesn't mean that his framework doesn't have a reasonable basis. I'm adamant to bring this up because this subject keeps coming up, again and again. Each time I notice that it's mostly the same people that feel justified in rejecting it all-together - meanwhile no one ever provides proper evidence for their rejection, like honestly, what do other russian socionists say in regards to this matter?
    INFp-Ni

  38. #38
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ehm mitsuii, what's the conclusion of your rant?
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  39. #39
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by meatburger
    Sex attitudes:

    Aggressor: "you will submit to my will or i will destroy you"
    Infantile: "Is that your breast/wirry?" "yes..." "may i touch it?" "yes!" " oh my god i touched it can i touch it again?" ""
    Victim: "Spank me till my buttocks are raw!"
    Careful: "No thats too much Skin. I will show you the bottom of my ankle. This was hot in the olden days you know?"
    rotfl
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  40. #40

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    2,916
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by meatburger
    Sex attitudes:

    Aggressor: "you will submit to my will or i will destroy you"
    Infantile: "Is that your breast/wirry?" "yes..." "may i touch it?" "yes!" " oh my god i touched it can i touch it again?" ""
    Victim: "Spank me till my buttocks are raw!"
    Careful: "No thats too much Skin. I will show you the bottom of my ankle. This was hot in the olden days you know?"
    LOL! That's hilarious. Love it.
    Somewhat true too.
    INTp
    sx/sp

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •