Given that it seems to match the "Manic" love style, or is Mania simply an uncontrolled and unfulfilled Victim style?
Is "Victim" romancing style healthy?
Given that it seems to match the "Manic" love style, or is Mania simply an uncontrolled and unfulfilled Victim style?
someone's got to be the bottom bitch
In all seriousness, tho, I think it is misfounded to start making sweeping generalizations like "All Ni types have manic tendencies". I think there may be correlation between type and certain personality disorders, but not always a one to one comorbidity. I was in a relationship with a Delta NF with bipolar. She was both "manic" per se but also loved in that patently Delta sentimental way. I'm a counterphobic 6, so the way I "love" usually tends to consist of testing people's loyalty by pushing them to the brink of despising me, and seeing if they break. A Gamma NT 5 or 1 or 8 might love completely differently.
The point I'm trying to make is that there are variations on these socionics archetypes, each person is actualized uniquely in his or her own way. All the Victim love style really says is "Ni types tend to wait for the initiative of others". Don't over-attribute qualities to it.
The name "victim" can't be healthy for anyone's self-esteem.
To clarify, I didn't mean bipolar mania, I meant Mania as in one of Lee's love styles.
oh. I feel dumb,Originally Posted by Holon
In that case, I think Lee's Love Styles are a crock of horse shit. coming from a uptight protestant christian world view not sufficiently informed by the visions of Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, Darwin and Freud, who taught us that sex is ugly, and that love is combat. it denigrates actual human behavior in favor of fairytale love (agape), the sexiness-extinguishing friend zone strategy (storge) and love as accounting (pragma). It is bile produced by an inferior mind and to think that it could be used to critique the penetrating insight of Jung is laughable.
(of course this is all just my opinion)
Doesn't have anything to do with erotic attitude.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
I've seen Fe associated with Mania, Ni with Agape, Te with Pragma.
Does it feel healthy to you?
It's not.
that shit will get you high but it'll kill you.
So, you're saying victim romance style is unhealthy, for whom the victim the aggressor or both? Only four romance styles and if the victim one is not then the aggressive one is not either and if both the aggressive style and the victim style are unhealthy then the infantile caregiver styles ARE healthy, or are all four of them unhealthy because on of them is unhealthy and the other three are healthy, or maybe three of them are unhealthy and only one of them is healthy, or maybe only one of them is unhealthy and the other three are healthy, or maybe aw fuck it?
Or maybe if it feels good and you still feel sane afterwards then it is healthy???
Last edited by wacey; 06-21-2014 at 01:11 PM.
feeling sane is overrated.
I think feeling/being insane serves it propose, in the long run sanity is much more preferable.
You're making me dizzy manI feel infantile-caregiver dynamic is healthier in a way that it's less likely to make you go completely mental. More stable and predictable I guess, with more established rules of the game.
Aggressor - victim dynamic can be highly toxic for both parties, not just for victims.
Not to say other types of relationships can't make you lose it if you're prone to that.
Infants keep needing care, caregivers love giving care.You're making me dizzy man
Aggressor - victim dynamic can be highly toxic for both parties, not just for victims.
Not to say other types of relationships can't make you lose it if you're prone to that.
Victims like... uh... this dynamic's not so easy to put in words.
Been involved with all four. It's people who are unhealthy, not socionic erotic romance styles.
Agreed, it's probably just me.
D-d-d-d-diaper time
Well you are still young, maybe haven't met the grown-up aggressors.
It's nuanced, and depends on the circumstance. Life is so deliciously complicated. I'm generalizing here but from what I've experienced in life, most women prefer the man to be the dominant/aggressive one but not so much where they get beaten or anything. And it's 'aggressive' in ways they can personally tame and control. It's always sexy when the serial killer spares your life because he thinks your 'special.'
A good dom will do things like self-confidently spit on your face but then check in to see how you are doing. Even if it's done in this mock caring, condescending way, it works- because he steps back and adjusts himself to your reactions to it and reads how much you like it. Chances are he'll know it turned you on crazily (or he wouldn't have done it in the first place), and then strings your lust for that along.... making you desire and want him even more, which opens up your limits and allows the relationship to 'go somewhere' and evolve out of dead boundaries.
A bad dom will just be like 'WOMEN LIKE ALPHA MALES YOU WORTHLESS WHORE' and then rape/kill them. There's no real relationship going on here, and the person is most likely a repressed homosexual who is insecure about their masculine identity.... I know tons of very homoerotic men who do this same thing to women. The homosexual male species has evolved over eons to be more social and diplomatic to straight lifeforms .. but the ancient and pure homosexual men wanted to brutally kill all women, not design clothes with them and giggle.
Somehow, it just isn't the same for the infant when an aggressor's in charge.
i love that show
is this the relationship where each partner expects the other one to make the initial rape?
You'd think caregiver-caregiver would be the most healthy:
You know, two adults, taking care of each other, supporting each other's needs and stuff.
Warm Regards,
Clowns & Entropy
I didn't find it before ..but here it is : http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...Pairs-by-Meged
Yeah, definitely. Maybe the Russian word for it has a less negative connotation, but in English it has a lot of baggage.
The Russians are hardy folk. They can take it.
To me Caregiver appears to be the most healthy in a way that´s refined by society and gender norms. Aggressor seems the most ´natural´ - think a pack of animals.
no, that´s LSI-EIE duality.
experiencing victim romance is the next thing on my list, right after converting to a man so that i can have sex from the pov of a male
Healthy
Unhealthy
Ye gods, not the infamous 'healthy' / 'unhealthy' dichotomy.
Health comes in degrees.
Compulsive obsessions are mostly harmful and therefore mostly unhealthy. Being focused on romantic obsession, a "manic" love style does have a higher risk of going out of control and harming the person, aka becoming "unhealthy". However, that does not mean that it is "unhealthy" in general. We all have our little obsessions – unless they are not harmful to the individual themselves, or others, it is okay.
The same applies to romance styles.
Now, I personally would not see a strong indicator in the description of the Victim romance style that implies a "manic" love style. It is possible, but not inherently and always correlated – in my opinion.
Having said that, the Victim-Aggressor dynamic does have a higher risk of turning into a very harmful and unhealthy dynamic, similar to the "manic" love style. Nevertheless, the dynamic is not inherently "unhealthy". It is like saying Victim types are "unhealthy" by default, which is simply not true.
To summarize:
• Victim romance is neither inherently healthy or unhealthy, it depends on the individual's health and on that of their romantic partner
• Some Victims seem to swing the "manic love" way, but "manic love" is not limited to Victim types. In addition, this love style is not unhealthy by default, just like the Victim romance is not.
Victim intimacy is intoxicating. If someone puts another person up on a pedestal, what happens whenever the beloved gets knocked to the ground?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
