Relationship games of Deltas

[InkStrider]

The Betas are known for playing their push-pull, strength-testing, aggressor-victim whirlwind romancing games. Any ideas on how Delta games tend to play out in real life?

[anndelise]

Us? Play games? Never!!
We are above such things.




*cough cough*

[InkStrider]

Us? Play games? Never!!
We are above such things.




*cough cough*

I believe you not. Spill!

[anndelise]

as soon as I figure it out, I'll spill..maybe...depends on how badly it eats my ego up.

meanwhile, I'll watch what others have to say about it.
this should be interesting...

[Galen]

I hate games

[717495]

Deltas are too busy doing real life shtuff, especially on Sundays.

[InkStrider]

I hate games

Same here. I realize that it has a negative connotation, but Deltas too should have a distinct style of going about this dance. Two steps forward, one step back on the part of the STs, perhaps?

Deltas are too busy doing real life shtuff, especially on Sundays.

Ah. Cool sn btw

[anndelise]

This may be considered a game:

I fairly often make straight-faced comments that hint at some ammusing idea I'm having...and I wait to see how the person I'm talking to responds. If they think the comment was literal or if they catch the irony of it, or the odd viewpoint it gives. A play on words/ideas. If the person joins in, continuing the game, the "scenario" gets funnier and funnier, yet outsiders might think we are being delusionally serious. If the person at leasts laughs, even if not joining in, then at least they might be someone I can relax around. But if they take me literal, or think it's something I'm absolutely convinced about, then I will tread carefully around them...unable to be myself.

I'm not sure it's a delta thing though.

I'm still thinking.
I'm relatively confident that there's some kind of interaction dealing with the caregiver thing, which to an outsider might seem like a conscious "game", but which is just a result of Delta NFs being themselves, and Delta STs responding to it. But I can't yet form the idea well enough to put it into words.

[Taknamay]

I think I can understand what anndelise is talking about. I have a friend who I think might be my identical, we do this all the time.

[InkStrider]

This may be considered a game:

I fairly often make straight-faced comments that hint at some ammusing idea I'm having...and I wait to see how the person I'm talking to responds. If they think the comment was literal or if they catch the irony of it, or the odd viewpoint it gives. A play on words/ideas. If the person joins in, continuing the game, the "scenario" gets funnier and funnier, yet outsiders might think we are being delusionally serious. If the person at leasts laughs, even if not joining in, then at least they might be someone I can relax around. But if they take me literal, or think it's something I'm absolutely convinced about, then I will tread carefully around them...unable to be myself.

I'm not sure it's a delta thing though.

It might be. I do this too. It's probably Ne related humor. If the other party "gets" it, and plays along, it can get really hilarious when we eventually burst out laughing in the end. If they don't get catch it, it just stops short and I shrug nonchalantly moving on to other topics. Just not on the same wavelength.

I think I can understand what anndelise is talking about. I have a friend who I think might be my identical, we do this all the time.

I'm still thinking.
I'm relatively confident that there's some kind of interaction dealing with the caregiver thing, which to an outsider might seem like a conscious "game", but which is just a result of Delta NFs being themselves, and Delta STs responding to it. But I can't yet form the idea well enough to put it into words.

Me too. It would be interesting to be able to pin it down.

[Cuddly McFluffles]

Are we talking "romantic games" or something else?

[InkStrider]

Are we talking "romantic games" or something else?

Both really. Generally Delta ST and Delta NF interaction, whether connected to romance or not.

[anndelise]

I don't think it's necessarily Ne humour. I've played word games like this with NiFe, too.

[InkStrider]

I don't think it's necessarily Ne humour. I've played word games like this with NiFe, too.

Hmm yes that may be so. Them INFps can be particular witty with wordplays. I've known ISTps who make me go as well.

[Cuddly McFluffles]

Are we talking "romantic games" or something else?

Both really. Generally Delta ST and Delta NF interaction, whether connected to romance or not.

OK. I haven't been in a relationship at this time, so I can't say too much about the dynamics. When dealing with attraction, I tend to go pretty cold toward the object of my affection. I'm generally afraid of showing too much attachment and being rebuffed. This is a somewhat recently learned habit that I would really like to go away.

General interaction... It seems I'm not the only Delta into verbal sparring (*cough*UDP*cough*). It's a lot of fun being able to rag on each other as friends. Past that, I haven't definitively identified any of my friends as Delta, so I cannot help you.

[InkStrider]

When dealing with attraction, I tend to go pretty cold toward the object of my affection. I'm generally afraid of showing too much attachment and being rebuffed. This is a somewhat recently learned habit that I would really like to go away.

Hmm I think every person regardless of type would be afraid of rejection to a certain extent. But this tendency you speak of (going cold toward the object of affection), why do you do that? Even if afraid of showing too much affection, there is no need to go cold right? What if you end up deterring your object of affection instead?

Past that, I haven't definitively identified any of my friends as Delta, so I cannot help you.

Ah no, I meant this to be a general discussion, but thank you all the same for having the thought.

[Cuddly McFluffles]

Hmm I think every person regardless of type would be afraid of rejection to a certain extent.

I'm very afraid of rejection. Irrationally so.

But this tendency you speak of (going cold toward the object of affection), why do you do that?

Because I am afraid they will not feel the same level of affection I do and therefore be repulsed by my sentiments.

Even if afraid of showing too much affection, there is no need to go cold right? What if you end up deterring your object of affection instead?

Yes, there is a good chance I'll give that person the wrong impression.

Past that, I haven't definitively identified any of my friends as Delta, so I cannot help you.

Ah no, I meant this to be a general discussion, but thank you all the same for having the thought.

I'm a little confused. I thought you were looking for information on interaction between Deltas. I would need experience in such matters to be able to contribute more. Did I misunderstand?

[InkStrider]

I'm very afraid of rejection. Irrationally so.

Because I am afraid they will not feel the same level of affection I do and therefore be repulsed by my sentiments.

But doesn't it cross your mind that they might welcome such sentiments instead? Would you personally be repulsed if such be done to you?

Yes, there is a good chance I'll give that person the wrong impression.

What would you do, assuming this did happen?

I'm a little confused. I thought you were looking for information on interaction between Deltas. I would need experience in such matters to be able to contribute more. Did I misunderstand?

Not at all. I misunderstood you to mean that I was seeking assistance, when it was posed with a dose of good ol' curiosity.

[Cuddly McFluffles]

But doesn't it cross your mind that they might welcome such sentiments instead?

Not usually, no.

Would you personally be repulsed if such be done to you?

It would depend on whether our levels of attachment were equal. It would also depend on the mode of expression.

What would you do, assuming this did happen?

If I gave the wrong impression? I don't know. It might be too late.

Not at all. I misunderstood you to mean that I was seeking assistance, when it was posed with a dose of good ol' curiosity.

OK.

[InkStrider]

But doesn't it cross your mind that they might welcome such sentiments instead?

Not usually, no.

Ah, then perhaps it should.

Would you personally be repulsed if such be done to you?

It would depend on whether our levels of attachment were equal. It would also depend on the mode of expression.

Assuming that they were equal, and with a suitable mode of expression, would you not fall? Why still hesitation in such a case, when the opposite is welcome?

If I gave the wrong impression? I don't know. It might be too late.

Prevention is better than cure, wouldn't you say? I understand the need for caution, but EIIs unfortunately tend to err on the side of caution.

[Lobo]

The Betas are known for playing their push-pull, strength-testing, aggressor-victim whirlwind romancing games. Any ideas on how Delta games tend to play out in real life?

I get the feeling that something specific happened to you and you're wondering if socionics had anything to do with it. Just a hunch, but I could be wrong ...

It's funny that you started this thread since I've been having issues related to it as well. I don't think Deltas are likely to play games, as in doing things on purpose to create relationship tension. However, I do think there is such a thing as making yourself out to be too needy or interested, which usually is a turn off to people. I'm somewhat like Ryene when it comes to appearing cold, but it's definitely not on purpose (I think I'm coming off as way too interested when it's actually the opposite).

At the end of the day, games can work very well to keep someone on edge in the beginning... It works especially well on anxious people too, because they are likely to be the first to find closure from the tension they are experiencing. I happen to be part of this group of people, and end being the initiator most of the time because of this. However, there's also an amount of resentment that builds up from someone using these games on me (either on purpose or not) and it sucks the enjoyment out of things for me. Usually it don't end well when I think someone is playing games on me, or being cold for no reason. It backfires really bad on them, unless their actions are done out of not being interested, which is what I assume.

[Cuddly McFluffles]

Not usually, no.

Ah, then perhaps it should.

Probably.

Assuming that they were equal, and with a suitable mode of expression, would you not fall? Why still hesitation in such a case, when the opposite is welcome?

Could you rephrase that? It's a bit unclear.

If I gave the wrong impression? I don't know. It might be too late.

Prevention is better than cure, wouldn't you say? I understand the need for caution, but EIIs unfortunately tend to err on the side of caution.

I don't know that I can blame on this on my type. It's probably more circumstance-based; I had a physically-oriented friendship blow up in my face about four years ago, and I can't recall acting this way before then.

[anndelise]

Similar to what's been written,
I know that when I was dating, I was usually quick to form an attachment, but be anxious that I might be overwhelming the other person, so I would try to pull back some, maybe appear nonchalant about it, but the attachment always seemed to show through, making my behavior quite eratic. It was, as you said, two steps forward, one step back.

I also had this thing where I quickly got to know about a person, heard their stories they had to tell, that I'd get them talking about. Showing a keen interest in the person, and then once it felt as if I knew as much about them as they had to tell, I'd wind up losing interest. Relationships with other extroverts never lasted long...except SeTi...where it was based on sex, not getting to know each other.

Which is probably why my relationship with my SiFe has lasted so long. He rarely talks, so when he does, it's something special to me. It makes it very difficult to get to know him, so my interest is maintained much longer. Similar happened with an SiTe I dated. I had a total crush on him, still do. Not because of his physique, but because there was so much to him that I never got to know.

[Beautiful sky]

Being exceedingly strait forward with one another is one that I am and prefer of my relationships. I don't like playing any games. If someone were playing games with me, they would be very disappointed because they wouldn't hear from me again (until I decided to forgive them and let it go).

This may be considered a game:

I fairly often make straight-faced comments that hint at some ammusing idea I'm having...and I wait to see how the person I'm talking to responds. If they think the comment was literal or if they catch the irony of it, or the odd viewpoint it gives. A play on words/ideas. If the person joins in, continuing the game, the "scenario" gets funnier and funnier, yet outsiders might think we are being delusionally serious. If the person at leasts laughs, even if not joining in, then at least they might be someone I can relax around. But if they take me literal, or think it's something I'm absolutely convinced about, then I will tread carefully around them...unable to be myself.

I'm not sure it's a delta thing though.

I'm still thinking.
I'm relatively confident that there's some kind of interaction dealing with the caregiver thing, which to an outsider might seem like a conscious "game", but which is just a result of Delta NFs being themselves, and Delta STs responding to it. But I can't yet form the idea well enough to put it into words.

That's because you demonstrate Fe; your mirror does not, we ignore it.

[Nico1e]

I don't know what 'games' are. All I know is that whenever I am interacting with someone, I'm not able to 'disconnect' from myself and control the situation from outside myself. I'm always 'in' myself, and usually scared and anxious about something, or uncomfortable, or trying to think of something to say. In order to play what I think is a 'game,' you would have to be able to see the whole situation, understand what's going on, look ahead into the future, and try to control the outcome, which I am not at all able to do. I just stumble around cluelessly, which, as far as I know, is the exact opposite of playing games. Nothing is deliberate, I'm just sincerely stupid.

[Galen]

Oh weird, I thought I edited my post to give a serious response.

I just figure that why would anybody bother to complicate a relationship by throwing a set of rules on top of it? Just take it as it is, roll with it, don't waste time beating around the bush.

[anndelise]

I think there is some misunderstanding regarding what InkStrider is referring to as "game". My understanding is that InkStrider is referring to the subconscious actions we do/don't do that an outsider might look at and accuse the person of playing games.

For example, in my cases, an outsider might accuse me of playing hot'n'cold, or using someone until I get what I want and then dropping them once I got it. But inside, that's not what is actually happening. I have no rules or criteria pre-set that I intend to follow in the relationship. That would be exhausting and icky to me. But looking back, I do have tendencies to lose interest pretty fast. An outsider could easily misinterpret my actions, interpret it as intentional, and accuse me of playing games.

[Korpsy Knievel]

I just figure that why would anybody bother to complicate a relationship by throwing a set of rules on top of it? Just take it as it is, roll with it, don't waste time beating around the bush.

If it feels necessary to impose rules on a relationship then something in the milk ain't clean.

YA HERRRRRD

[Minde]

I don't know what 'games' are.

This. ^

The word "games" initially struck me as having negative connotations, though I realize that's not necessarily the case. Playing can be fun.

I might play them, I'm not sure. I think if I do they're of the accidental type, like "teasing" people by being undecided but wanting to hold on.

Playfulness, though - I'll do that when in the right mood. I usually don't feel smart or forethougtful enough to keep something really witty going for a long time. I could see myself lightly (intentionally) teasing, both verbally and physically. But that would only happen after a certain point as is more of an in-the-moment kind of thing rather than planned.



Hitting "preview post" brought up Ann's latest response, so I have new thoughts.

My "game" would probably be relational teasing - or stringing people along, leading them on. Not too proud of that one. I swear I don't mean any harm!

[Minde]

I'm very afraid of rejection. Irrationally so.

Because I am afraid they will not feel the same level of affection I do and therefore be repulsed by my sentiments.

But doesn't it cross your mind that they might welcome such sentiments instead? Would you personally be repulsed if such be done to you?

Slightly OT, I know, but... In some cases, YES! Maybe my gender has something to do with it, but I can immediately think of two circumstances in my life where I really did not want to be the object of affection. (Still don't, actually... ) This is mostly because the other persons were of a creepy nature.


BTW, Ryene, you're not creepy. You're beautiful and adorable and anyone should be honored at the least to be an object of your affection if not totally flattered and overjoyed. Just sayin'.

[Radio]

I fairly often make straight-faced comments that hint at some ammusing idea I'm having...and I wait to see how the person I'm talking to responds. If they think the comment was literal or if they catch the irony of it, or the odd viewpoint it gives. A play on words/ideas. If the person joins in, continuing the game, the "scenario" gets funnier and funnier, yet outsiders might think we are being delusionally serious. If the person at leasts laughs, even if not joining in, then at least they might be someone I can relax around. But if they take me literal, or think it's something I'm absolutely convinced about, then I will tread carefully around them...unable to be myself

Yes.

Strangely, the two people I know that catch onto this the quickest are both ISFp.

[pianosinger]

I have always tried to be very straightforward and open-faced with other people. So much so, that I think people tend to take this for granted once they realize my genuineness. On the darker side, however, this makes it quite easy for me to make a convincing show of knowing nothing (when I really do) or being more innocent about something than I really am.

This really frustrates my husband sometimes, because he can never keep any secrets from me as I always see right through him (maybe it's his Fe-PoLR), but it's so easy for me to keep things from him (like what I'm getting him for Christmas) and he never even suspects that I'm hiding something until I choose to reveal it.

I also do the thing where I take people's words literally, even when they're meant as a joke, and act or speak accordingly. This doesn't always get the response I hope for, though. Often I just end up confusing or annoying people, so I only really do it with people I think will respond well, or at least not respond badly.

[somavision]

On the darker side, however, this makes it quite easy for me to make a convincing show of knowing nothing (when I really do) or being more innocent about something than I really am.

I relate.

[InkStrider]

I get the feeling that something specific happened to you and you're wondering if socionics had anything to do with it. Just a hunch, but I could be wrong ...

You have a crystal ball or something? Lend it to me.

I don't think Deltas are likely to play games, as in doing things on purpose to create relationship tension.

Ah, I think you've caught on to something there.

At the end of the day, games can work very well to keep someone on edge in the beginning... It works especially well on anxious people too, because they are likely to be the first to find closure from the tension they are experiencing. I happen to be part of this group of people, and end being the initiator most of the time because of this.

I personally can't tolerate such tension for very long myself.

However, there's also an amount of resentment that builds up from someone using these games on me (either on purpose or not) and it sucks the enjoyment out of things for me. Usually it don't end well when I think someone is playing games on me, or being cold for no reason. It backfires really bad on them, unless their actions are done out of not being interested, which is what I assume.

I am guilty of this too, when I'm feeling unsure especially when it's too much for me to handle. It's like there's a targeted closeness that I am to achieve, and when I've finally achieved it, I wonder what it means. I hesitate, and ask myself if this feels "right" and what comes next. At this point, I might act coldly just to gauge if the relations have actually moved for the other person as well or if it's just all in my mind, and to give myself some space to think. If they show some sort of reaction/react badly to my coldness, it shows that I'm important enough to them for them to be affected by my actions. And if I do get into a panic of sorts, this shows that hey, I must like them pretty bad or I wouldn't be feeling this way, right? In which I finally gain a sense of certainty and start on my next move to try and develop a closer bond.

Assuming that they were equal, and with a suitable mode of expression, would you not fall? Why still hesitation in such a case, when the opposite is welcome?

Could you rephrase that? It's a bit unclear.

It's basically a fancy way of telling you to ignore your fear of rejection and be less inhibited in expressing your inner sentiments, if the person feels right to you.

I don't know that I can blame on this on my type. It's probably more circumstance-based; I had a physically-oriented friendship blow up in my face about four years ago, and I can't recall acting this way before then.

Sorry to hear that. Bad experiences do tend to have a post-traumatic effect of sorts.

Nothing is deliberate, I'm just sincerely stupid.

That sure rings a bell.

I just figure that why would anybody bother to complicate a relationship by throwing a set of rules on top of it? Just take it as it is, roll with it, don't waste time beating around the bush.

I'm actually thinking of the general dynamics of how we tend to roll with it, in a more specific sense.

I think there is some misunderstanding regarding what InkStrider is referring to as "game". My understanding is that InkStrider is referring to the subconscious actions we do/don't do that an outsider might look at and accuse the person of playing games.

Yep.

Slightly OT, I know, but... In some cases, YES! Maybe my gender has something to do with it, but I can immediately think of two circumstances in my life where I really did not want to be the object of affection. (Still don't, actually... ) This is mostly because the other persons were of a creepy nature.

I don't blame you for being creeped out. But assuming there had been mutual attraction, I doubt that you would have felt the same way.

[pianosinger]

http://youtu.be/Z6h4LoMgqlI

[Lobo]

You have a crystal ball or something? Lend it to me.

ya, u can haz.

I am guilty of this too, when I'm feeling unsure especially when it's too much for me to handle. It's like there's a targeted closeness that I am to achieve, and when I've finally achieved it, I wonder what it means. I hesitate, and ask myself if this feels "right" and what comes next. At this point, I might act coldly just to gauge if the relations have actually moved for the other person as well or if it's just all in my mind, and to give myself some space to think. If they show some sort of reaction/react badly to my coldness, it shows that I'm important enough to them for them to be affected by my actions. And if I do get into a panic of sorts, this shows that hey, I must like them pretty bad or I wouldn't be feeling this way, right? In which I finally gain a sense of certainty and start on my next move to try and develop a closer bond.

I don't think anxiety level is a good way to determine if someone likes you, or vice-versa. Like I was saying, you can manipulate someone who is anxious with "games," such as purposefully applying a void of communication for an extended period of time. It's not that you like the person that makes you anxious during this time, it's that you're afraid of losing someone based on you not acting/the uncertainty aspect. It's not fear of losing said person, it's the act itself of losing someone this way and trying to obtain control which ends up making you give in and call (if all that makes any sense, lol). Once the anxiety fades and you see what happened, and how silly it was, you might get turned off by the person and move on.

[Galen]

I think there is some misunderstanding regarding what InkStrider is referring to as "game". My understanding is that InkStrider is referring to the subconscious actions we do/don't do that an outsider might look at and accuse the person of playing games.

For example, in my cases, an outsider might accuse me of playing hot'n'cold, or using someone until I get what I want and then dropping them once I got it. But inside, that's not what is actually happening. I have no rules or criteria pre-set that I intend to follow in the relationship. That would be exhausting and icky to me. But looking back, I do have tendencies to lose interest pretty fast. An outsider could easily misinterpret my actions, interpret it as intentional, and accuse me of playing games.

I see.

In that case, I can pretend to overreact about something, feign panic or discomfort or whatever, and sometimes people think I'm being serious and I have to explain that I wasn't seriously panicking. I find that people tend to not know when I'm joking or not anyways, so who knows if that's relevant to anything. I also tend to come off as more indecisive than I should be. I'll sort of approach people as if to ask them for help, but then I beat around the bush and never ask them for the help I may (or may not) have wanted. Even if I don't ask, it definitely comes off as if I'm not confident in whatever I was trying to do. This sort of game is purely unintentional, and the only reason for it I could imagine is latent E6-ey indecisiveness and shyness.

[Beautiful sky]

I enjoy gentle teasing and usually I can laugh at most of LSE perverse humor, over the top sexual humor that most would find offensive.

InkStrider, I, like Minde, did take games to mean a negative approach to someone. In general, Delta STs do play games to get assurance that the other person still loves them. I like to think of Revolutionary Road and the husband cheating on his wife, then telling her to be sure that she reaffirms her love for him, but is disappointed when this is not reciprocated. But, that stems from insecurity of the Delta STs and I do think that it's time this is disposed of because these insecurities should be realized, consciously, and then there will be no need for playing games to try to gauge relationship proximity.

I was straight forward with my LSE boyfriend and told him that I knew everything there was to know about his type and I expected him to behave with me as he would have me with him and through finding about Socionics, he released his insecurities and found no need to be anything but himself, minus the insecurities, with me. This is very possible.

I like to remember and recall some lines of a local comedian who said, "I don't know why I hurt you, why I push you away." These, I later told him, were acts of insecurity and acts from the subconscious element of Fi and how it plays a role from that area of the person's psyche. I told him is was done because you need the person to be vocal, expressive of their love, commitment, and attention, otherwise he can't judge the proximity of the relation he has, whether it's real, there, worthy, etc.

[InkStrider]

I don't think anxiety level is a good way to determine if someone likes you, or vice-versa. Like I was saying, you can manipulate someone who is anxious with "games," such as purposefully applying a void of communication for an extended period of time. It's not that you like the person that makes you anxious during this time, it's that you're afraid of losing someone based on you not acting/the uncertainty aspect. It's not fear of losing said person, it's the act itself of losing someone this way and trying to obtain control which ends up making you give in and call (if all that makes any sense, lol). Once the anxiety fades and you see what happened, and how silly it was, you might get turned off by the person and move on.

Yes... Strange that this never crossed my mind prior to your mentioning. I've somehow equated liking the person with the degree of anxiety I feel throughout the uncertainty. If I feel nothing, I automatically assume that I don't care enough about them, which may not at all be the case.

I enjoy gentle teasing and usually I can laugh at most of LSE perverse humor, over the top sexual humor that most would find offensive.

Such a humor is more a matter of individual preference. I personally find it distasteful.

InkStrider, I, like Minde, did take games to mean a negative approach to someone. In general, Delta STs do play games to get assurance that the other person still loves them.

I don't view Delta STs as needing too much external assurance. Delta NFs tend to make little steps/do considerate things/undertoned verbality in various occasions to imply that they do hold you as important, which is sufficient assurance for me.

I like to think of Revolutionary Road and the husband cheating on his wife, then telling her to be sure that she reaffirms her love for him, but is disappointed when this is not reciprocated. But, that stems from insecurity of the Delta STs and I do think that it's time this is disposed of because these insecurities should be realized, consciously, and then there will be no need for playing games to try to gauge relationship proximity.

Playing games to gauge relationship proximity is more of a Beta thing. When I do feel insecure about the proximity of a relationship, I ask. And when I do, I usually discover that there's a problem/uncertainty somewhere that needs addressing. I address it and all is well again. It's simple and straightforward, with no need for drama.

I was straight forward with my LSE boyfriend and told him that I knew everything there was to know about his type and I expected him to behave with me as he would have me with him and through finding about Socionics, he released his insecurities and found no need to be anything but himself, minus the insecurities, with me. This is very possible.

Honestly, this sort of behaviour is likely to annoy me to the max. Just because you know everything there is to know about my type, doesn't mean you know anything about me. Expecting me to act in conformity to some set notion of type pisses me off, as is telling me what I should be or should not.

I like to remember and recall some lines of a local comedian who said, "I don't know why I hurt you, why I push you away." These, I later told him, were acts of insecurity and acts from the subconscious element of Fi and how it plays a role from that area of the person's psyche. I told him is was done because you need the person to be vocal, expressive of their love, commitment, and attention, otherwise he can't judge the proximity of the relation he has, whether it's real, there, worthy, etc.

I don't need people to be vocal or expressive of their love for me, as such expressions are likely to make me uncomfortable, unless done in a soft, undertone manner in sincere appreciation. That's what makes me melt.

[Suz]

InkStrider, I, like Minde, did take games to mean a negative approach to someone. In general, Delta STs do play games to get assurance that the other person still loves them.

I've actually had a similar experience with delta STs (SLIs to be exact). I'd previously thought this is an SLI thing, as LSEs tend to be more direct (at least in theory). In practice might be different, perhaps.

Just when everything is going great, SLIs suddenly act distant, or do something mean (of course, it's subtle, but delta NFs are very sensitive to subtle). My instinct is to assume they're not interested though prior interaction does leave open the possibility that they are, which leaves me very confused. But i'm starting to think it's a way they test me for the degree of my interest. Like, if i show that i'm hurt at their behavior, or call them out on it, it might mean more than if i'm indifferent or if i just move on.

I remember reading in a description of SLI-IEE duality something along the lines of "Gaben [SLI] is slow to believe or trust the feelings of his somewhat frivolous dual." So he doesn't go simply by my efforts to talk to him and be IEE-flirty, and maybe doing these mean things is to test my intentions. Which objectively speaking, is probably a good idea, because i can be just as chatty and friendly with people i feel platonic with, that IS true.

I think, Inkstrider, that the difference between such behavior in delta STs versus the betas, lies in the subtlety of it. Both still play games that could perhaps be described the same way, but manifest differently. Delta NFs tend to be much more in tune with very subtle aspects of things like body language, unspoken actions, etc than betas might be.

I was straight forward with my LSE boyfriend and told him that I knew everything there was to know about his type and I expected him to behave with me as he would have me with him and through finding about Socionics, he released his insecurities and found no need to be anything but himself, minus the insecurities, with me. This is very possible.

This is sort of a bad thing to talk about with a boyfriend. Talking socionics with a bf makes one seem creepy imo.