For example, a young woman SEE has brought up a story from her personal life for public discussion, which involved fighting off her current husband from his lawful wife and thus destroying their marriage. She felt the necessity to do so because from the very first meeting she understood that this man is fated for her. This meeting took place about half a year before his marriage, when he first met his first wife. So why hasn't she started a relationship with him back then? It turned out that it was from this moment that she started building her strategy of getting close to him (SEE is a strategic type), and part of this strategy was allowing him to marry another woman.
Couldn't she lose him by allowing him to enter another relationship, to form strong bonds with someone else, or at least create insurmountable obstacles for herself? Let me remind the reader that other people's established personal and social ties do not hold significance for this dyad. It was precisely for such newly emergent obstacles that this whole strategy was created. To complicate the situation even further, she started dating a close friend of the man she has "chosen" and kept resorting to this "tactic" all the way until his wedding day. It was only after the day of his marriage that she decided to take action. At this point she started looking for any chances and opportunities to meet with him, to establish a close and trusting relationship with him, and to make the most favorable impression of herself. She was constantly searching for ways to advantageously distinguish herself from his current wife and make herself look as the "winning" opposite to her in everything. In her own words, this is how it went:
"I've always tried to distinguish myself from her in the most beneficial to myself ways. Even at a wedding when the bride was dressed in all white, I came in a spectacular black dress. As soon as I arrived, other guests at the wedding started asking one another: "Who is she?" His friends and relatives came up to me and said, "Oh, what a pity that you aren't by the side of the groom. You are so beautiful!" And then I again thought to myself that he must be made my husband."
Since that day, such "winning contrast" became the main behavioral style of this young SEE woman. When after half a year the young husband realized that all her efforts were directed at him, he was able to appreciate this and divorced his wife to marry this woman. That's how easily she has attained her success.
So why invest all these efforts? Why didn't she start dating this man when he was still single? Why did she allow him to marry another woman at first? Why did she start seeing one of his friends if she already knew that she was going to leave him? This is what the public did not understand and condemned her for this. Meanwhile she even took offense at the public censure (isn't it a pity that her strategy wasn't appreciated?), since she invested all this effort exactly so that she would be correctly appreciated, such that assessing her actions her partner would develop certain feelings that would correspond to her priorities and that would allow the relationship to take forms that she was most comfortable with.
Obstacles in this case were necessary in order to overcome them, as this is the necessary and indispensable condition for dualization in this dyad. Let's not forget that in the third quadra, just as well as in all democratic quadras, evolutionary irrational aspects (with a "+" sign) dominate. In particular, the third quadra is dominated by the aspect of volitional sensing (+Se) – the aspect that accumulates and mobilizes forces for the following contention, for a forceful and massive breakthrough, for overcoming of the obstacles.
3. SEE. The program of the onslaught and overcoming.
In the third quadra, and especially the dyad SEE-ILI, the ability to show one's own willful superiority, to demonstrate one's advantages in power and capability, to favorably present one's own qualities, to persistently broadcast one's will to contend, to impose this on others and come out on top, that is, to use any and all opportunities to demonstrate your ability and willingness to get out of any situation as the prizewinner (even if it earns everyone else's condemnation) are all valued.
How is it possible to show one's will, determination, drive, if there are no obstacles? If there are no obstacles - there is nothing to overcome. And if there is nothing to overcome, then there are no opportunities to interest your partner, and other people, in yourself.
However, in our previous example, the man has preferred another woman at first. Why would this be? Most likely because she has shown considerable initiative in winning him over at first, while our SEE heroine got busy creating new obstacles for herself by starting a relationship with his friend. When our SEE heroine entered the scene in the role of contender, a major opportunity opened up before her to show in full that she is capable and determined - to get out of her situation and break up another's relationship would require much effort than her competition had the opportunity to demonstrate. By creating all these obstacles, she has seized a major opportunity to prove that she is "stronger than the strongest".
Unfortunately, the "audience" did not understand this SEE woman and appreciate her "heroic feat" for its true worth, despite the fact that she was absolutely certain in her own right to so forcefully achieve her happiness. "The strongest wins and the strongest leads away" – such was the conclusion of our SEE heroine who felt quite offended by the fact that nobody else has supported her in this opinion.
Doesn't she feel ashamed of such attitudes? The person is typically not ashamed of the values of his EGO functions. What feels shameful is departure or deviation from these values. Thus the SEE may feel ashamed if she has demonstrated weakness, or if she wasn't able to seize an opportunity and come out as a winner in this situation. But when SEE is showing his strengths and capabilities, he or she is not betraying his main values.
And for this purpose the SEE allows herself to take away what belongs to someone else? If what belongs to someone else is better than what SEE has, and if it is already gravitating towards her, the SEE considers that she is simply taking what is rightfully hers. In the realm of human relations, first the SEE feels that she is a more suitable partner for somebody else than their current partner. Later, if she does indeed turn out to be stronger than her competition, this indicates that she will be able to do more for her partner than his previous match, and therefore her love is stronger.
Piling up of obstacles could be called a kind of "courting ritual" of this dyad, or, more accurately, a part of the interplay of their dual relations. Our SEE protagonist might not have been so successful in her endeavors if it wasn't for the fact that her choice fell to a man of sociotype ILI, suggestive in Se and therefore is easily persuaded by her actions on this aspect. If this SEE woman would have tried win over a partner of some other sociotype, perhaps her strategy would not have worked so quickly and successfully. Although, if the will is there, SEEs are capable of breaking up almost any relationship. It is difficult to endure and counteract their onslaught and determination. The author knows of several stories where well-established dual relationships have been broken up by a SEE who couldn't calmly live in presence of someone else's happiness.
SEE is not always consciously aware of the full impact that his EGO functions have on the people and environment around him. He can strongly influence others without noticing this himself and without actually wishing to cause any harm – he simply strongly wants to achieve something, to win someone over, to attain something for himself. The more the person resists – the more the SEE intensifies his efforts. In our example, the man hasn't put up much of a resistance so our SEE had to create obstacles of her own – allow him to marry another woman and start another relationship herself. Since all of this possibly transpired with his silent agreement, it can be even said that it was both of them who have created these barriers.
Is ISFj similar to ESFp in romance behavior?
Well, in Delta, and probably the other Quadra's, we'd just say this is not okay - you don't plan a take-over of another person's spouse. As an IEE, this is an interesting explanation of what a person who does this might be thinking. And, if the SEE did the very same thing without waiting for the SEE to marry someone else before she moved in on him, then i would say it might be admirably interesting what she did.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by lungs
) - Bridges of Madison County, the Notebook - she may have thought that there was a moral high ground to romantic love that even surpassed a breach of marriage. 
So, yes, her main motivation was not power, but the promise of the great romance. (my glimpse of her power-interest must have been a glimpse of her "second goal")...
in the ego block like you do, but that damned irrational function just doesn't like you in the slightest. Aggressors don't much like caregivers, just like victims don't much like infantiles and vice-versa.
"conqueror" may feel justified in taking the mate of another only to find out that their conquest is devoid of the qualities they envisioned it having in the end (
ain't the same as 
, which is what they really wanted out of the deal). Like how a prince may conquer a province they believe is filled with gold when instead it is filled with pyrite (i.e. Fools Gold). They, and their subjects in turn, won't be happy about this but now that ya did it you're, well, kinda stuck holding the bag...
(as per tcaudilllg)
.
Wouldn't that still be a lot of work to get the attention of a female?
