Erotic Attitudes

@End how do you feel about the INTp description above?

@Sol if you didn't understand what I meant by infantile (childlike).

Victim

The Victim types, identified as such by Viktor Gulenko, are the four types with Ni in their ego, two each in Beta and Gamma: EIE, IEI, LIE, and ILI.Despite the differences between these types in terms of temperament, base function, and quadra values, it seems that in the area of physical attraction, desire, and flirting, their Ni, coupled with their expectations of Se style behavior in intimate partners, is the most visible factor in a Victim's behavior.

Typical characteristics of the Victim romance style

• prone to initial doubts about intensity of own interest in another person
• not always confident about revealing that interest
• inclined to focus on whether or not the other person might reciprocate the interest
• inclined to question whether or not the other person's interest will remain constant with time
• preference for partners that provoke in the individual a certain sense of awe in terms of power, physical presence, and the like
• appreciation for the sense of power-play present when interacting with such partners, with acceptance of a slight sense of superiority on the part of the partner, without ever actually "submitting" to them
• this takes the form of the individual somewhat expecting the partner to be "mean" on occasion in the case of Victim males with female partners, this latter trait assumes a characteristic analogous to a "knight devoted to his princess"
• inclination to openly admit to a relationship having been ended by the partner rather than by the individual himself

This romance style is defined by focus on Ni which is dynamic, irrational, and introverted, with perceptions of inner imagery away from the present physical reality. This means that a Victim sees attraction between two individuals as a dynamic state, which he feels is completely natural. This accounts for a Victim's inclination to focus on the mutual attraction, or particularly the attraction felt by the other person, as to its longer-term perspectives and implications, as well as a certain expectation that the partner will continuously take action to confirm the attraction. Failure on the partner to do so results on the individual assuming that it's already changing. The individual counts on the partner to forcefully bring the individual "down to earth from his thoughts " and focus on the immediate physical reality, continuously.- See more at: http://www.sociotype.com/socionics/r....7D8fAigi.dpuf

Infantile

The Infantile types, identified as such by Viktor Gulenko, are the four types with Ne in their ego, two each in Alpha and Delta: ILE, LII, IEE, and EII. Despite the differences between these types in terms of temperament, base function, and quadra values, it seems that in the area of physical attraction, desire, and flirting, their Ne, coupled with their expectations of Si style behavior in intimate partners, is the most visible factor in determining "infantile'" behavior.

Typical characteristics of the Infantile romance style

• interest is sparked in partner with positive aesthetic attributes divorced from active, "aggressive" sexuality
• tend to try to attract partner's interest with joking, goofy or even "strange" behavior
• try to help partner see the unexpected and fun side of things
• interest is maintained or cools off according to partner's response to this behavior
• appreciation for partner who actively cares about the individual's comfort and daily needs
• neutral with regard to externally admitting who took the initiative in ending a relationship, "power" is seen as unimportant in such matters

- See more at: http://www.sociotype.com/socionics/r....7D8fAigi.dpuf

"He approaches his love interest almost with the intention to "teach.""

To care - yes, but not to teach. To teach means relations of generally unequals, while everyone seeks support in relations not less than has the wish to care about partner.

"Like the childlike type, he may tend to live "outside sexuality" and may have to intellectualize it in order to be comfortable."

Ne types have Si in values so they never prefer to live "outside of sexuality". It's important part of their life. Especially for ILE, IEE.

another heretic poor article

Originally Posted by Sol

"He approaches his love interest almost with the intention to "teach.""

To care - yes, but not to teach. To teach means relations of generally unequals, while everyone seeks support in relations not less than has the wish to care about partner.

"Like the childlike type, he may tend to live "outside sexuality" and may have to intellectualize it in order to be comfortable."

Ne types have Si in values so they never prefer to live "outside of sexuality". It's important part of their life. Especially for ILE, IEE.

another heretic poor article

This is accurate

interest is sparked in partner with positive aesthetic attributes divorced from active, "aggressive" sexuality
tend to try to attract partner's interest with joking, goofy or even "strange" behavior
try to help partner see the unexpected and fun side of things
interest is maintained or cools off according to partner's response to this behavior
appreciation for partner who actively cares about the individual's comfort and daily needs
neutral with regard to externally admitting who took the initiative in ending a relationship, "power" is seen as unimportant in such matters

@Aylen. In regards to the article I don't much fault it. For me it really is about finding someone who doesn't "break" or otherwise run the hell away once I disclose my darkest desires. I'm sure this is the case for girls as well, but it comes from the opposite direction. Lots of dudes talk a good game, but if a real girl legit begged them to tie em' up and do hardcore kinky shit to em' I'm pretty sure a lot of them would run away because she's "crazy" or something.

I mean fuck, life must suck for fully masochistic girls who also want decent, moral, and caring partners to lovingly dominate them and whisper how much they love them into their ear after a session of good hard love making. They're in dangerous territory to be honest. The people who are willing to give you what you want in this department can very easily just be taking advantage of you for their own benefit. Yet in the end they still want that and are willing to take the risk to get it. Being a "victim" type is complicated...

It's a shame that this article has been rated so poorly.

This theory is one of the most valuable ones in Socionics, imo.

Beside the rapey - aggressor/victim - and pedophilic - caregiver/infantile - notions (pointing to a patriarchal basis of this writing), the idea is good. I prefer what Zero11 said above to establish equal means and not misinterpreting the dynamics into an egotistical power exchange; that's not what actual romance is.

I think people have a mix of erotic attitudes. The purely this, this, this, or that, seems like a black and white way of thinking.

Originally Posted by Nate Chur

I think people have a mix of erotic attitudes. The purely this, this, this, or that, seems like a black and white way of thinking.

LOUDER FOR THE PEOPLE IN THE BACK!

Yes yes yes and yes. Especially when tapping into other IEs under the influence of one's partner. Depending on your counterpart, functions are always activated differently anyways so this view can limit.

Originally Posted by Chae

LOUDER FOR THE PEOPLE IN THE BACK!

Yes yes yes and yes. Especially when tapping into other IEs under the influence of one's partner. Depending on your counterpart, functions are always activated differently anyways so this view can limit.

Our brains are beautifully complex, dynamic, adaptable organs, are they not?

Someone's subtype influences how much they may lean to the other fellow dynamic or static type.

In that manner, all Aggressors have a Childlike side and vice versa, and all Victims have a Caretaker side and vice versa.

How much this "comes out" or is present in the person depends on the subtype.
(For example, SEE-Fi and SLE-Ti are a bit more Childlike, IEE-Fi and ILE-Ti are a bit more Aggressor, etc.)

Still, the main style mostly prevails, and at the very least becomes apparent on a closer basis.

Most people's romance style behaviour is unconscious, they do not act this way deliberately. Once you deliberately choose to act in a certain way, like acting more coy or aggressive because you get the impression the other person would like that more, you are not acting according to your natural romance style.

They exist as only some, not all, which means they cannot be relied upon as conclusive evidence. Types are theoretical categories that apply to some, but not all people. There is varying degrees of truth in it for different people, depending on its descriptive accuracy.

Originally Posted by Nate Chur

Our brains are beautifully complex, dynamic, adaptable organs, are they not?

Yes ;3; Wonderfully put.

Originally Posted by Cassandra

It's a shame that this article has been rated so poorly.

This theory is one of the most valuable ones in Socionics, imo.

Ya its awesome!

This is a good example of a Victim attitude... lol:

Into You - Ariana Grande

Oh, baby, look what you started
The temperature's rising in here
Is this gonna happen?
Been waiting and waiting for you to make a move
(woo, oh, oh, oh)
Before I make a move
(woo, oh, oh, oh)

[Chorus:]
So, baby, come light me up, and maybe I'll let you on it
A little bit dangerous, but, baby, that's how I want it
A little less conversation and a little more "touch my body"
'Cause I'm so into you, into you, into you

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ekZEVeXwek

And I'd suppose the "a little less conversation" line from the Elvis' song is more Se:

"A Little Less Conversation"

A little less conversation, a little more action please
All this aggravation ain't satisfactioning me
A little more bite and a little less bark
A little less fight and a little more spark
Close your mouth and open up your heart and baby satisfy me
Satisfy me baby

Come on baby I'm tired of talking
Grab your coat and let's start walking
Come on, come on
Come on, come on
Come on, come on
Don't procrastinate, don't articulate
Girl it's getting late, gettin' upset waitin' around

None of the styles fit me, so I can't take this seriously. I find that Enneagram plays a much bigger part than IMs.

"Teachers: LSE (ESTj) SLI (ISTp)

If I were to describe this type's approach to love, it would be "serious." He approaches his love interest almost with the intention to "teach." This can quite possibly rub the object of his affection in the wrong way, possibly interpreted as condescension.He is looking for a worthy pupil."

Now THAT makes sense and explains a lot.
Like why my best friends are childlike types, or why it always seems like I've to "teach" stuff to my friends or my IEE, and why even being a caregiver I'm not "motherly" at all or even why I hate being a student. I'm actually a Teacher, which makes more sense. I really love sharing knowledge instead of "taking care" of others.

In my case it's a mix of suposed opposites:

Typical characteristics of the Aggressor romance style

• no doubts about own interest in another person
• not prone to hesitation about whether or not to reveal that interest
• focus is more on own interest than whether or not the other person might reciprocate
• romantic interaction is more about "toughness" than "tenderness"
• needs to feel some sense of "superiority" over the partner, but worthwhile only if the partner is seen as able to largely "keep up"
• this takes the form of power games, which others might regard as cruel or bitchy
• in the case of female Aggressors with male partners, the above tends to assume the characteristic of a woman expecting total * devotion from the partner, rather than her being "bossy"
• little inclination to externally admit not having been the one to end a relationship, unless if adopting a "who cares" front simultaneously

This romance style is defined by focus on Se which is static, irrational, and extroverted. This means that an Aggressor sees attraction to another person as a static state, which he feels it is up to him to change in the direction more in agreement to his preference. This accounts for an Aggressor's inclination to take the initiative in approaching the object of his interest and being "relentless" in his pursuit, as well as, even during an established relationship, continuing to try to "shake things up" or "get things moving". If his partner is not receptive to such behavior, this discourages the Aggressor, and results in his interest cooling off.

Bolded parts fits to a T the rest is really off.

Typical characteristics of the Victim romance style

• prone to initial doubts about intensity of own interest in another person
• not always confident about revealing that interest
• inclined to focus on whether or not the other person might reciprocate the interest
• inclined to question whether or not the other person's interest will remain constant with time
• preference for partners that provoke in the individual a certain sense of awe in terms of power, physical presence, and the like
• appreciation for the sense of power-play present when interacting with such partners, with acceptance of a slight sense of superiority on the part of the partner, without ever actually "submitting" to them
• this takes the form of the individual somewhat expecting the partner to be "mean" on occasion in the case of Victim males with female partners, this latter trait assumes a characteristic analogous to a "knight devoted to his princess"
• inclination to openly admit to a relationship having been ended by the partner rather than by the individual himself

This romance style is defined by focus on Ni which is dynamic, irrational, and introverted, with perceptions of inner imagery away from the present physical reality. This means that a Victim sees attraction between two individuals as a dynamic state, which he feels is completely natural. This accounts for a Victim's inclination to focus on the mutual attraction, or particularly the attraction felt by the other person, as to its longer-term perspectives and implications, as well as a certain expectation that the partner will continuously take action to confirm the attraction. Failure on the partner to do so results on the individual assuming that it's already changing. The individual counts on the partner to forcefully bring the individual "down to earth from his thoughts " and focus on the immediate physical reality, continuously.

Bolded parts are spot on and would complement the ones in the Aggressor type.

Originally Posted by Slugabed

"Teachers: LSE (ESTj) SLI (ISTp)

If I were to describe this type's approach to love, it would be "serious." He approaches his love interest almost with the intention to "teach." This can quite possibly rub the object of his affection in the wrong way, possibly interpreted as condescension.He is looking for a worthy pupil."

Now THAT makes sense and explains a lot.
Like why my best friends are childlike types, or why it always seems like I've to "teach" stuff to my friends or my IEE, and why even being a caregiver I'm not "motherly" at all or even why I hate being a student. I'm actually a Teacher, which makes more sense. I really love sharing knowledge instead of "taking care" of others.

Ohooohoo I find that interesting and like it It works out best when the Ne type has some enneagram 6/9 influence so they would accept the guidance. E1 EII and E7 IEE are more difficult here.

Delta is about knowledge exchange anyway so the true dynamic of Si/Ne is rooted in Alpha. Taking care is cool when it comes from a cognitive perspective since what you think, you become. If someone doesn't pamper me but explains how I can take care of myself, I find that far more useful and rewarding for both. If I'm just being taken care of, how exploitative is that. It makes more sense to have no inferior Ne - superior Si perspective on this.

Originally Posted by LuckyOne

In my case it's a mix of suposed opposites:


Bolded parts fits to a T the rest is really off.

Bolded parts are spot on and would complement the ones in the Aggressor type.

Your case is super difficult 8 SX naturally assumes those qualities so it's hard to distinguish. The question is, what's the information that you accept more: force or time estimation? Enneagram is all about the innate drive but the styles here actually describe what type of IE use is supposed to turn you the fuck on If you're EIE you might overestimate the Se part within the equation, if you're Se base then your attraction to would actually be obvious here.