Results 1 to 25 of 25

Thread: Erotic Styles Are Relative

  1. #1
    Aramas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    2,263
    Mentioned
    127 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default Erotic Styles Are Relative

    So, the dichotomy Aggressor/Victim applies to NiSe and Infantile/Caregiver applies to NeSi? Wrong.

    Everyone has some aspect of each: Aggressor, Caregiver, Victim, and Infantile. Extroverted ego functions are aggressive, introverted are caregiving. In the superid, the introverted function is infantile, and the extroverted function is the victim function. (I think this idea was mentioned somewhere before, but it's been a long time, and I figured it deserved its own place.) @Olimpia might disagree with all this, but there's more!

    Every quadra tends to see opposing extroverted elements as wrongfully aggressive, and introverted elements as unnecessarily restrictive, potentially microaggressive or passive aggressive, or weak. The reason why gamma and beta got smacked with the aggressive label to begin with was Gulenko's position in the alpha quadra. Of course Se seems aggressive to him. It's his PoLR. It's doubtful, though, that Se in its purest form is perceived as aggressive by the people in the Beta and Gamma quadras. And Si types are quite capable of being aggressive when they want to be.

    Power games can exist in any quadra. It's not just about Se and Ni.
    Last edited by Aramas; 09-28-2018 at 01:29 AM.

  2. #2
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,896
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    i think its true anyone can be aggressive or perceived as aggressive but I think Gulenko was tapping into a pre-existing literary tradition that used victim/aggressor to characterize certain interactions. in a vacuum "aggressive" may sound like a reproach because in today's world its often used that way, but I don't think it has to, nor do I think such simple biases pervade Gulenkos work (as if he was either intending to be biased or caught up in them unwittingly--I think neither of these). in any case, he uses "volitional sensing" to describe Se nowadays. imagine if he started out using completely non loaded language to describe those romantic or general approaches to life, i don't think anyone would know what he's talking about. maybe in hindsight he should have, but if people project their own meanings onto victim/aggressor thats something that's built into the dynamic itself, unless you want a truly objective behavioral description of romance itself.. I think its a kind of impossibility to not use some kind of potentially ethical language, otherwise you're left with brain states or some other stuff that doesn't really express those dynamics in all their color. if people think "aggressive/victim" is gross or whatever and they also think they're Se valuing, I actually think that's a sign they're not Se valuing, or they've been raised to be self hating in some sense. I tend to think there's a lot of "roleplaying" of type online and attempts to "rehabilitate" things like Se/Ni are really unwitting attempts to impose a person's "true" values onto a "role" they're playing in order to make it a better fit for themselves. in essence I would say, people can recognize aggression and not think its automatically bad, if it really describes them, whereas if a person thinks of themselves as a Se/Ni type but thinks aggression is bad, thats actually symptomatic of them not "getting it" and wanting to remake the type description in order to suit their own attempt to be something they are not. a part of genuinely being "aggressive" is not caring about being perceived as such when you think the aggression is justified.. in other words, they don't have a per se objection to "aggression"--that is something for other types. there's something kind of caregiverish in trying to rehabilitate Se types as "not being bad" in this way, maybe they want to be bad --as soon as they're more concerned with remaking their image to be friendlier they're sort of losing what it is that makes them aggressors to begin with. in essence, if Se types don't perceive themselves as at least a little aggressive, to me that suggest theyre not really Se types. this perception is inside, they may never cop to it, but I think if they read gulenko they can recognize what he's talking about and its not necessarily a reproach and it doesn't need to be explained away as a bias or considered unfair. it merely reflects the situation as it really is

  3. #3
    Aramas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    2,263
    Mentioned
    127 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bertrand View Post
    i think its true anyone can be aggressive or perceived as aggressive but I think Gulenko was tapping into a pre-existing literary tradition that used victim/aggressor to characterize certain interactions. in a vacuum "aggressive" may sound like a reproach because in today's world its often used that way, but I don't think it has to, nor do I think such simple biases pervade Gulenkos work (as if he was either intending to be biased or caught up in them unwittingly--I think neither of these). in any case, he uses "volitional sensing" to describe Se nowadays. imagine if he started out using completely non loaded language to describe those romantic or general approaches to life, i don't think anyone would know what he's talking about. maybe in hindsight he should have, but if people project their own meanings onto victim/aggressor thats something that's built into the dynamic itself, unless you want a truly objective behavioral description of romance itself.. I think its a kind of impossibility to not use some kind of ethical language, otherwise you're left with brain states or some other stuff that doesn't really express those dynamics in all their color. if people think "aggressive/victim" is gross or whatever and they also think they're Se valuing, I actually think that's a sign they're not Se valuing, or they've been raised to be self hating in some sense
    I don't think aggressive/victim necessarily has anything to do whatsoever with the Se-valuing quadras, though. It's not specific to them. People all aggress, but in different contexts. Where that's socially acceptable depends on the quadra that has control in the social situation.

  4. #4
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,896
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    I agree anyone can be perceived as aggressive, but aggressor/victim has a certain flavor to it that is specific to a certain style and is more than a slur... if you start from the assumption aggressor/victim is a dynamic everyone participates in, the same is true of caregiver/infantile. the thing is all 4 terms has a specific meaning in the context of socionics.. if you start from the general meaning and read it back into socionics of course it screws everything up, because anyone can be all 4 and at different times they will be. my point is they're not general terms but have specific psychological histories in the psycho analytic tradition so when Gulenko uses them he means particular things. the fact a general audience goes back in and thinks he means something different is not really his bias, or if it is, its (in the case of G) the bias of a person in relationship to a pre-existing body of knowledge of which the outside observer is ignorant of.. technically that is a bias, but I think the answer is to adopt his bias, and not resist it on the theory he is alpha and therefore depreciatory of other quadra.. that just seems like a typical sort of post modern rejection of a tradition on the assumption its flawed at the root. like saying he's sexist or something because gender binariness as a traditional mode of thinking about gender is irredeemably patriarchal and everything related to it needs to be re-labeled or tossed out as fruit of a poison tree. I actually think that's just intellectual laziness. its a lot easier than having to learn the tradition if you can just pass judgement on it up front and reject it as fatally flawed because it doesn't conform to present norms, on little more than the assumption that present norms should control, as if they didn't arise out of the very tradition one would like to "forget" about. its not just throwing away the ladder but forgetting ladders actually existed and meant something in the first place. like I said gulenko talks about Se as violitional sensing now anyway, but victim/aggressor is not really bad a priori

  5. #5
    Tigerfadder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    TIM
    ILE
    Posts
    1,305
    Mentioned
    31 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aramas View Post
    So, the dichotomy Aggressor/Victim applies to NiSe and Infantile/Caregiver applies to NeSi? Wrong.

    Everyone has some aspect of each: Aggressor, Caregiver, Victim, and Infantile. Extroverted ego functions are aggressive, introverted are caregiving. In the superid, the introverted function is infantile, and the extroverted function is the victim function. (I think this idea was mentioned somewhere before, but it's been a long time, and I figured it deserved its own place.) @Olimpia might disagree with all this, but there's more!

    Every quadra tends to see opposing extroverted elements as wrongfully aggressive, and introverted elements as unnecessarily restrictive, potentially microaggressive or passive aggressive, or weak. The reason why gamma and beta got smacked with the aggressive label to begin with was Gulenko's position in the alpha quadra. Of course Se seems aggressive to him. It's his PoLR. It's doubtful, though, that Se in its purest form is perceived as aggressive by the people in the Beta and Gamma quadras. And Si types are quite capable of being aggressive when they want to be.

    Power games can exist in any quadra. It's not just about Se and Ni.
    I agree that gulenko might be biased toward his own type and quadra. Se and perhaps Pe in general is a hands-on inclusion of the extroverted state of reality...

  6. #6
    Rebelondeck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    1,929
    Mentioned
    175 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Linking cognitive thinking to an erotic style is a real stretch. Erotic fantasies and approaches are more related to perceived social expectations, and the required testosterone or hormone levels must also be present. Sexual preferences are rooted in our more primitive instincts and our cognitive styles try to make them realizable, but cognition has no control over animalistic urges other than to suppress them. One cannot say, for example, that all sadists must be from the aggressor grouping.

    a.k.a I/O

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    15,766
    Mentioned
    1404 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aramas View Post
    Power games can exist in any quadra. It's not just about Se and Ni.
    Anything can exist at people of any type and in any quadra. The difference is in the average degrees of that. Type is the balance of traits, but not a pack of absolute traits.

    Se/Ni valued types have higher inclination to "power games", s&m, etc. - have more of this expressed in the behavior. while Si/Ne prefer caring, sensual and tender styles and express more of it

  8. #8
    wasp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    TIM
    ZGM
    Posts
    1,578
    Mentioned
    132 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    i usually just think of the erotic styles this way which is independent from the negative connotations commonly associated with their titles

    caregiver - passive, direct
    childlike - active, indirect
    aggressor - active, direct
    victim - passive, indirect

    caregivers are just as comfortable with "directness" as aggressors, but if i had to illustrate the difference with a hypothetical example which i'm sure will be misinterpreted - it's the difference between saying "you're an asshole" but upon realizing how hurtful it was, you backtrack and apologize (Si) as opposed to taking it a few steps further to solidify your anger (Se) so if you think of it that way, even Si egos can act "aggressively" but i think there's a point where they'll want to correct their transgressions but this is less common with Se egos, and it's precisely that distinction which results in Si egos disliking aggression in themselves while Se egos will usually feel justified in their aggression

    it's hard to explain but i think there are degrees to this

    Si leads are "comfort being" - they project a caring attitude by remaining calm, so it's a natural byproduct of being themselves but it comes across as "caring" to outsiders, while Si creatives are more "comfort creating" - they strive to remain calm but Se demonstrative gives them an aggressive edge occasionally, and they're "comfort creating" because they're more likely to take the initiative in producing a comfortable environment for their Ne ego counterparts (in contrast with Si leads who are more like the embodiment of comfort)

    Ip-Pi > Ip-Je > Ej-Pi >Ej-Je ("comfort being" to "comfort creating")

    it becomes a little more complicated once you take quadra values into account, and i think the difference is ultimately rooted in Fe vs Te

    now the reason that Si egos are characterized as "direct" but "passive" as opposed to "active" is because they require Si seeking cues from their Ne ego counterparts in order to capitalize on opportunities to offer Si - whether it be in the form of acting as a calm presence, or the stereotypical definition ("would you like a blanket, maybe a bowl of soup?") and sometimes i even see it manifest as a protective attitude in times of personal distress but instead of saying "hey i'll bash your head in if you don't leave him/her alone" it's more like "hey, maybe you should go easy on him/her" while Ni egos tend to offer assistance to their Se ego counterparts in the form of direction (for lack of a better word)

    it makes perfect sense in my head but it's extremely hard to articulate because there are a lot of nuances

  9. #9
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,896
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    I don't think victims think of themselves as passive (its a form of lowkey activity--in time, of course this is invisible to the wrong types), you just trade one set of loaded terms for another because this particular set appeals to you. victim has a special meaning and it has more to do with being martyrd or "sacrificial"--of course caregivers love to complain about being martyrs as well. the difference is victims have an actual tradition of getting on a cross. the bottom line is because romance styles are near to the heart of every dyad there is no way capture the dynamic in a way that pleases everyone just like strat can't write a dual description that other dual pairs find attractive. even if they could you'd just have every type getting forer'd into thinking they could be any dual pair because they all sound so good. its the same problem with there being an attractive celebrity of universal appeal for every type or a scientific genius of every type and other forms of democratic watering down of what it means to be a type. eventually its all packed into meaningless words precisely because the one thing everyone can agree on is that its all palpable. it just zeroes out the entire distinction between anything with a fake sheen of "inoffensive" and therefore neutral and therefore true language. when in fact its just a particular form of social creep that ruins everything by allowing anyone to claim anything and it not mattering or standing for anything. this is seen as an improvement but its illusory because it actually further alienates people from the reality that these distinctions in fact exist, which is the whole point of socionics. everyone can't in fact just get "what they want" when it comes to typology--you're not supposed to "please everyone". in short, this is an issue for someone who has a keen eye for whats what in the first place. in the final analysis romance styles don't even matter because of how collateral they are to typology, but what happens is if the masses are allowed to ruin them youll just have people typing themselves by romance styles instead of the base system, because they will use any avenue to "prove" whatever nonsense they settled on up front. in this way if one doesn't draw the line on some of this stuff you just have morons "inhabit" that area of "typology" because it allows for them to come to whatever conclusions they like and no one tried to say otherwise. thus little fiefdoms pop up and the whole thing gets fractured once people have some kind of "claim" to expertise over "their area"--the whole project is retarded. the romance style section is re-written, and in classic 16types form--people just search and cherry pick the description they like the most. as if it were some kind of role-playing game. if you don't like victim/aggressor, just fuck off already, its not for you, and neither are you "helping" it by rewriting it so a bunch of infantiles can appropriate it. ever consider its fullfilling its function admirably precisely because it rubs people the wrong way? as if everyone should approve of everything--the whole lesson of socionics is its not that simple

    victim/aggressor goes to the heart of why it is people experience the world differently, these misguided attempts to "tone it down" by making it more palpable in the name of "objectivity" or even "neutrality" completely miss the point


    the idea that its a label no one would self apply from where you're from doesn't make it wrong--thats the entire point. you can turn it into passive/indirect, but it robs the victim of a lot of its moral force, it makes them sound like helpless children which is just a projection of caregiving types onto victims and flattens out half the depth of the entire socion. if you look around in real life youll see this provoke a violent reaction over and over and its like totally lost on the caregiving types--they just think any victim is a mentally ill infantile, this is a huge problem of misunderstanding in real life that regularly creeps in. the end state would just be drugging victims back into an infantile oblivion, out of a misguided sense of compassion, and whatever they had to say was totally lost on everyone. this is the danger of pseudo psychological understanding in the hands of those ill equipped to actually comprehend such things, because it empowers them with confidence to do these sort of stuff which can end up amounting to an atrocity when adopted on a large scale. instead of attempts by amateurs to rewrite the work of brilliant people like Gulenko more time should be spent simply trying to comprehend him as given. what starts out as sheer intellectual laziness ends up hurting quite a large swath of people. it would be better to be able to teach what G means instead of rewriting him for people, which in effect simply neuters the meaning and destroys his work. there's a pernicious kind of appropriation at work because if someone just wrote their own system we'd all be free to mock it as the half baked misunderstanding it is, but when the name remains on the work like Gulenko but it in effect is some random interpretation by a forum goer there's this veneer of legitimacy that should not be. in essence no one is stopping anyone from coming up with their own system but can we maybe put more effort into understanding Gulenko qua Gulenko instead of simply employing him like some kind of rubber stamp on something he never approved
    Last edited by Bertrand; 10-01-2018 at 11:26 PM.

  10. #10
    wasp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    TIM
    ZGM
    Posts
    1,578
    Mentioned
    132 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    yeah uh-huh i understand some of those words

    but seriously i think 80% your post is comprised of sporadic complaints about the forum in general - while the small portion of your post which directly references my own post doesn't seem to be addressing what i've actually written but instead inferences you've made based on a handful of quotes that rubbed you the wrong way, kinda like you've compiled those quotes into an invisible argument that you can argue against, which makes it pretty difficult to construct any type of productive response, but gulenko is cool I agree

  11. #11
    Darn Socks DirectorAbbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Southwest USA
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    7,123
    Mentioned
    382 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    I recall another list on this topic that I found interesting:

    EGO FUNCTIONS:

    Physical aggressor, spiritual infantile

    Physical caregiver, spiritual victim

    Physical infantile, spiritual aggressor

    Physical victim, spiritual caregiver

    Mental aggressor, emotional infantile

    Mental caregiver, emotional victim

    Mental infantile, emotional aggressor

    Mental victim, emotional caregiver

    LSE
    1-6-2 so/sx
    Johari Nohari

    Quote Originally Posted by Ritella View Post
    Over here, we'll put up with (almost) all of your crap. You just have to use the secret phrase: "I don't value it. It's related to <insert random element here>, which is not in my quadra."
    Quote Originally Posted by Aquagraph View Post
    Abbie is so boring and rigid it's awesome instead of boring and rigid. She seems so practical and down-to-the-ground.

  12. #12
    Spiritual Advisor Hope's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    TIM
    Celestial Sli
    Posts
    3,444
    Mentioned
    415 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Where are those from @Director Abbie ?

    And how spiritual victim and aggressor are defined?

  13. #13
    Darn Socks DirectorAbbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Southwest USA
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    7,123
    Mentioned
    382 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aki View Post
    Where are those from @Director Abbie?
    I don't recall exactly. I had it saved as a screenshot. Probably from the forum somewhere.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aki View Post
    And how spiritual victim and aggressor are defined?
    It came with no definitions. So I tried discussing it with an EII friend. Like a year ago. And I didn't take notes. And we never finished.
    Yet I can oddly relate to that without having a clear concept of the meaning.

    LSE
    1-6-2 so/sx
    Johari Nohari

    Quote Originally Posted by Ritella View Post
    Over here, we'll put up with (almost) all of your crap. You just have to use the secret phrase: "I don't value it. It's related to <insert random element here>, which is not in my quadra."
    Quote Originally Posted by Aquagraph View Post
    Abbie is so boring and rigid it's awesome instead of boring and rigid. She seems so practical and down-to-the-ground.

  14. #14

    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    2,018
    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Its no joke bert.

    I divorced with the wrong erotic style and it as you say. I was treated like a broken infatile type. “If only you would learn to love this”. Sitting across from him in a restaurant while he ordered us dinner, I was like a frustrated caged animal.

  15. #15
    Serious Left-Static Negativist Eliza Thomason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    eastern U.S.
    TIM
    ENFp, IEE
    Posts
    3,671
    Mentioned
    378 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wasp View Post
    i usually just think of the erotic styles this way which is independent from the negative connotations commonly associated with their titles

    caregiver - passive, direct
    childlike - active, indirect
    aggressor - active, direct
    victim - passive, indirect

    caregivers are just as comfortable with "directness" as aggressors, but if i had to illustrate the difference with a hypothetical example which i'm sure will be misinterpreted - it's the difference between saying "you're an asshole" but upon realizing how hurtful it was, you backtrack and apologize (Si) as opposed to taking it a few steps further to solidify your anger (Se) so if you think of it that way, even Si egos can act "aggressively" but i think there's a point where they'll want to correct their transgressions but this is less common with Se egos, and it's precisely that distinction which results in Si egos disliking aggression in themselves while Se egos will usually feel justified in their aggression

    it's hard to explain but i think there are degrees to this

    Si leads are "comfort being" - they project a caring attitude by remaining calm, so it's a natural byproduct of being themselves but it comes across as "caring" to outsiders, while Si creatives are more "comfort creating" - they strive to remain calm but Se demonstrative gives them an aggressive edge occasionally, and they're "comfort creating" because they're more likely to take the initiative in producing a comfortable environment for their Ne ego counterparts (in contrast with Si leads who are more like the embodiment of comfort)

    Ip-Pi > Ip-Je > Ej-Pi >Ej-Je ("comfort being" to "comfort creating")

    it becomes a little more complicated once you take quadra values into account, and i think the difference is ultimately rooted in Fe vs Te

    now the reason that Si egos are characterized as "direct" but "passive" as opposed to "active" is because they require Si seeking cues from their Ne ego counterparts in order to capitalize on opportunities to offer Si - whether it be in the form of acting as a calm presence, or the stereotypical definition ("would you like a blanket, maybe a bowl of soup?") and sometimes i even see it manifest as a protective attitude in times of personal distress but instead of saying "hey i'll bash your head in if you don't leave him/her alone" it's more like "hey, maybe you should go easy on him/her" while Ni egos tend to offer assistance to their Se ego counterparts in the form of direction (for lack of a better word)

    it makes perfect sense in my head but it's extremely hard to articulate because there are a lot of nuances
    I like this AND it's constructive. And it fits with the people I know. Especially thinking of my SLI husband and SLE son. Really fits.
    "A man with a definite belief always appears bizarre, because he does not change with the world; he has climbed into a fixed star, and the earth whizzes below him like a zoetrope."
    ........ G. ........... K. ............... C ........ H ........ E ...... S ........ T ...... E ........ R ........ T ........ O ........ N ........


    "Having a clear faith, based on the creed of the Church, is often labeled today as fundamentalism... Whereas relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and swept along
    by every wind of teaching, looks like the only
    attitude acceptable to today's standards."
    - Pope Benedict the XVI, "The Dictatorship of Relativism"

    .
    .
    .


  16. #16
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,896
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by timber View Post
    Its no joke bert.

    I divorced with the wrong erotic style and it as you say. I was treated like a broken infatile type. “If only you would learn to love this”. Sitting across from him in a restaurant while he ordered us dinner, I was like a frustrated caged animal.
    yup. "people" like wasp and eliza think they're helping but they're just kind of derping off a cliff

  17. #17
    Guillaine's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    TIM
    IEE 4w5 sx/so
    Posts
    394
    Mentioned
    29 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think people can be incompetent in their erotic style for whatever reason, like you can find childish caregivers, or caregivers expecting partners to be agressors because of their parents' types, or infantiles who can't let go of control so they can't really be that role. For me I become infantile around a competent caregiver but if that person is incompetant I can be all three of the others and generally dissatisfied.

  18. #18
    Xaiviay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    TIM
    SEI-Fe1 9w1 sx/sp
    Posts
    468
    Mentioned
    69 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aki View Post
    Where are those from @Director Abbie ?

    And how spiritual victim and aggressor are defined?
    http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ays-every-role
    They come from here, Aki. I had it saved because I love it so much.

    I've been having trouble explaining it myself, but my best guess is that a spiritual 'victim' likes to have their perceptions (or beliefs) challenged by the 'aggressor', who likes to surprise the victim and shake up their perception of reality. Saying unexpected things, probing with personal questions, pushing the Si-ego out of their comfort zone. Also that Si-egos like to be aggressively psycho-analyzed by their partner? As in... maybe they'll be reserved about their innermost imagination, or their intuitive ideals, but they like to have someone else push them with questions and analysis until that person understands them (in either a Fi way or a Ti way).

    That's my best explanation for it, anyway It's something I've enjoyed from Ne-leads who took an interest in me, but could never explain concretely. The concept of 'spiritual victim/agressor' hit home.


    Also, I high-key agree with this assessment:
    Quote Originally Posted by wasp View Post
    i usually just think of the erotic styles this way which is independent from the negative connotations commonly associated with their titles

    caregiver - passive, direct
    childlike - active, indirect
    aggressor - active, direct
    victim - passive, indirect

    caregivers are just as comfortable with "directness" as aggressors, but if i had to illustrate the difference with a hypothetical example which i'm sure will be misinterpreted - it's the difference between saying "you're an asshole" but upon realizing how hurtful it was, you backtrack and apologize (Si) as opposed to taking it a few steps further to solidify your anger (Se) so if you think of it that way, even Si egos can act "aggressively" but i think there's a point where they'll want to correct their transgressions but this is less common with Se egos, and it's precisely that distinction which results in Si egos disliking aggression in themselves while Se egos will usually feel justified in their aggression

    it's hard to explain but i think there are degrees to this

    Si leads are "comfort being" - they project a caring attitude by remaining calm, so it's a natural byproduct of being themselves but it comes across as "caring" to outsiders, while Si creatives are more "comfort creating" - they strive to remain calm but Se demonstrative gives them an aggressive edge occasionally, and they're "comfort creating" because they're more likely to take the initiative in producing a comfortable environment for their Ne ego counterparts (in contrast with Si leads who are more like the embodiment of comfort)

    Ip-Pi > Ip-Je > Ej-Pi >Ej-Je ("comfort being" to "comfort creating")

    it becomes a little more complicated once you take quadra values into account, and i think the difference is ultimately rooted in Fe vs Te

    now the reason that Si egos are characterized as "direct" but "passive" as opposed to "active" is because they require Si seeking cues from their Ne ego counterparts in order to capitalize on opportunities to offer Si - whether it be in the form of acting as a calm presence, or the stereotypical definition ("would you like a blanket, maybe a bowl of soup?") and sometimes i even see it manifest as a protective attitude in times of personal distress but instead of saying "hey i'll bash your head in if you don't leave him/her alone" it's more like "hey, maybe you should go easy on him/her" while Ni egos tend to offer assistance to their Se ego counterparts in the form of direction (for lack of a better word)

    it makes perfect sense in my head but it's extremely hard to articulate because there are a lot of nuances

  19. #19
    Spiritual Advisor Hope's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    TIM
    Celestial Sli
    Posts
    3,444
    Mentioned
    415 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xaiviay View Post
    http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ays-every-role
    They come from here, Aki. I had it saved because I love it so much.

    I've been having trouble explaining it myself, but my best guess is that a spiritual 'victim' likes to have their perceptions (or beliefs) challenged by the 'aggressor', who likes to surprise the victim and shake up their perception of reality. Saying unexpected things, probing with personal questions, pushing the Si-ego out of their comfort zone. Also that Si-egos like to be aggressively psycho-analyzed by their partner? As in... maybe they'll be reserved about their innermost imagination, or their intuitive ideals, but they like to have someone else push them with questions and analysis until that person understands them (in either a Fi way or a Ti way).
    Thanks a lot! Very interesting explanation, and actually yes, I've experienced it too.

    -Also that Si-egos like to be aggressively psycho-analyzed by their partner?

    Ime no I don't like it, though, IEEs seem prone to do it exactly like you described. At times it seems to me like they just like to contradict others and doing it as personal hobby, or even that it brings them some kind of enjoyment (or at least that's how I perceive it, mb they are not trying to be annoying). I've seen them just contradicting or taking that kind of devils advocate role with ppl they are very close with. They are not prone to show this side to causal acquaintances.

    Its annoying for me, often because they don't have a logical support to stand their point, but I tend to ignore it and not giving it so much importance. I think they experience something similar with me, is like what @meatburger was saying in another post, I feel like they are sometimes annoyed by me because they feel like I slow them down, and when I point the negative side of things to avoid waste or save effort in tasks.


    The concept of 'spiritual victim/agressor' hit home.
    Yes totally, lol

    Thank you

  20. #20
    Xaiviay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    TIM
    SEI-Fe1 9w1 sx/sp
    Posts
    468
    Mentioned
    69 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aki View Post
    Thanks a lot! Very interesting explanation, and actually yes, I've experienced it too.

    -Also that Si-egos like to be aggressively psycho-analyzed by their partner?

    Ime no I don't like it, though, IEEs seem prone to do it exactly like you described. At times it seems to me like they just like to contradict others and doing it as personal hobby, or even that it brings them some kind of enjoyment (or at least that's how I perceive it, mb they are not trying to be annoying). I've seen them just contradicting or taking that kind of devils advocate role with ppl they are very close with. They are not prone to show this side to causal acquaintances.

    Its annoying for me, often because they don't have a logical support to stand their point, but I tend to ignore it and not giving it so much importance. I think they experience something similar with me, is like what @meatburger was saying in another post, I feel like they are sometimes annoyed by me because they feel like I slow them down, and when I point the negative side of things to avoid waste or save effort in tasks.




    Yes totally, lol

    Thank you
    No problem! Thank you for your feedback, also! I was wondering if any other caregivers felt the same way,

    Ohhhh you don't like that? Maybe I like being psycho-analyzed because of my Ti-seeking, but I really do like it (thrive on it). And then again with ILEs, it's usually a more detached and objective analysis than the kind that IEEs give (and yes I do see what you're talking about. They like getting kind of competitive with their HA, maybe?). Meged has these descriptions of romantic love and in other articles she links them with each IM. This is each type according to each IM, in her view:

    Storge: Fi
    Mania: Fe
    Analita: Ti
    Pragma: Te
    Agape: Ni
    Filia: Ne
    Eros: Si
    Victoria: Se

    Does the description of Storge sound more like what you look for? I really like the Analita style, and it relates to what I said before.

  21. #21
    divine, too human WVBRY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    TIM
    LSI-C™
    Posts
    6,026
    Mentioned
    237 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aki View Post
    Where are those from @Director Abbie ?

    And how spiritual victim and aggressor are defined?
    Quote Originally Posted by Director Abbie View Post
    I don't recall exactly. I had it saved as a screenshot. Probably from the forum somewhere.
    It's from here: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ays-every-role

    Nevermind @Xaiviay already linked it .

  22. #22
    divine, too human WVBRY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    TIM
    LSI-C™
    Posts
    6,026
    Mentioned
    237 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Anyways, I think Gulenko's idea of erotic attitudes is correct.

    Yes, they can be interpreted in an overly rigid or literal way (ie aggressor types always behave aggressive). That happens when people forget they are descriptions of attitudes and not literal behaviors. Of course, attitudes will influence behavior but there isn't one way behaviors can manifest for the same attitude.

    I understand them as descriptions of self-perception, (a victim type sees themselves as a "bottom" in power games with potential partners, and aggressor sees themselves as the "top") not how one is perceived by others. A "victim" type might occupy an important position in society and thus might not be seen as a more masochistic partner. Infantile will see themselves as "deserving" to be taken care of by their partner but others might not understand it that way.

    These aeren't expressions of actual roles one plays in society. With victim/aggressor, usually they do not take on the form of bdsm type games either. There is a power exchange but it does not usually go that far.

    Bdsm is fairly culturally-bound too, it is basically a subculture that seems very diverse to outsiders but is actually very limited in terms of imagining new things. Trying to say victim/aggressor usually takes on the form of bdsm is hyperbole at best.

    So my understanding is that they are self-perception and how one perceives others, but this isn't "obvious" to others. In relationships where partners share compatible erotic attitudes (victim+aggressor, infantile+caregiver) there is an unspoken understanding which comes as a relief to both partners.

  23. #23
    Exodus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,472
    Mentioned
    332 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The only element that aggression can be reasonably linked to is Se. Get over it, all the elements have positive and negative aspects. I mean, if you're going to accuse someone of bias "infantile" isn't exactly a positive description either, is it?

  24. #24
    Seed my wickedness The Reality Denialist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Spontaneous Human Combustion
    TIM
    EIE-C-Ni ™
    Posts
    8,206
    Mentioned
    335 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Director Abbie View Post
    I recall another list on this topic that I found interesting:

    EGO FUNCTIONS:

    Physical aggressor, spiritual infantile

    Physical caregiver, spiritual victim

    Physical infantile, spiritual aggressor

    Physical victim, spiritual caregiver

    Mental aggressor, emotional infantile

    Mental caregiver, emotional victim

    Mental infantile, emotional aggressor

    Mental victim, emotional caregiver
    Something is going t change under my username.
    MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
    Winning is for losers

     

    Sincerely yours,
    idiosyncratic type
    Life is a joke but do you have a life?

    Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org

  25. #25
    IQ over 150 vesstheastralsilky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    TIM
    ~°~
    Posts
    1,488
    Mentioned
    77 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I have not found validity with the erotic styles. Varied styles do exist, but I have not been promiscuous enough to test all types and see if the theory may have merit but is using different functional definitions than I am (i.e. to see if they swapped all the types in a different orientation).
    ~* astralsilky



    Each essence is a separate glass,
    Through which Sun of Being’s Light is passed,
    Each tinted fragment sparkles with the Sun,
    A thousand colors, but the Light is One.

    Jami, 15th c. Persian Poet


    Post types & fully individuated before 2012 ...

Posting Permissions

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