Romancing styles: Victim-Aggressor interactions

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wilma

it is true what has been said here that it is the victim who is weak and wants for the strong agressor to take over, yes or not?? seems like not being balanced to me and i also am thinking if i may be victim but me, i do not thing i am weak

---

That's defiantly the stereotype; that the victim is the 'weaker' of the two.

I personally don't put much stock in stereotypes. Or at least try not to.

Can I have some examples or scenarios to help me understand these two and help me clear some things up.

Prone to initial doubts about intensity of own interest in another person.
How can you not know how you feel about someone ?

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 sounds a bit warped. I makes me think of dungeons, chains, whips and ball gags.

lol
oh victims are just those people who goes joking around instead of saying that this is not a joke but this is what they really want/feel/think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ProcrastinateTomorrow

Can I have some examples or scenarios to help me understand these two and help me clear some things up.

Prone to initial doubts about intensity of own interest in another person.
How can you not know how you feel about someone ?

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 sounds a bit warped. I makes me think of dungeons, chains, whips and ball gags.

---

Where are those descriptions from?

Wikisocion

I never know how I feel about someone. How is this NSFW?

My mention of dungeons, chains, whips and ball gags.

This could have turned into an S&M thread.
I just wanted to take precautions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jessica129

I never know how I feel about someone. How is this NSFW?

---

How can you not know how you feel. I know within the first 10 minutes of speaking to a person.

How can you know?

It's unsettling to be so sure about someone. My mind is forever changing. Also, I am drunk.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jessica129

How can you know?

It's unsettling to be so sure about someone. My mind is forever changing. Also, I am drunk.

---

LOl.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ProcrastinateTomorrow

Prone to initial doubts about intensity of own interest in another person.
How can you not know how you feel about someone ?

---

Yeah, that's pretty much bullshit. I establish very strong feelings of attraction/repulsion to people and things on immediate encounter. And it's not random impulse shit, either; I know exactly where the feelings arise from and why they do so. It's like a working barometer that's constantly being tweaked with each new stimulus encountered. There's always something subtle yet salient about a person, an underlying quality reaching out, that strongly points one way or the other for me. If I don't have this kind of reaction to a person, it's usually a sign that they are uninteresting.

So, that is not related to being a "victim."

Quote:

---

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 sounds a bit warped. I makes me think of dungeons, chains, whips and ball gags.

---

lol. Doesn't make me think of that. I like a slight tilt on the balance in a relationship, an undercurrent of competition. It keeps you on your feet, and demonstrates that your partner cares about more than simple satisfaction. It's a psychological game, not a bed-bound assrape, and I find the emotional impacts and turns very stimulating.

Prone to initial doubts about intensity of own interest in another person.

Not really true for me, except perhaps in a sense of "should I really try to start a relationship with this person", which isn't connected to interest or lack thereof.


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

I don't know about this, I suppose it's true in the emotional realm, where I don't really feel that confident. I won't try to change the status of the relationship and I'm a bit blind to attempts at manipulation, that can appear as a weakness somehow. I doubt though that it applies to all the other spheres of life, in Italy the culture is slightly matriarchal anyhow, I've heard ISTj males saying that in the household it's always the woman that has the upper hand, so I don't know if the above makes much sense tbh...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ProcrastinateTomorrow

Prone to initial doubts about intensity of own interest in another person.
How can you not know how you feel about someone ?

---

Future lines! I see options and, even if some option is very nice, very appealing, is still not 100% "the future". For example, there are some SLE girls I really like, two of them to be precise, but.... one of them doesn't want me in "that way" and the other is with someone else. How do I feel for them? I don't really know. I cannot say that is undying love otherwise I would not think about someone else. I definitely like each of them but I'm keeping my options open. If one of the SLEs takes direct action, the lines of futures collapse and the way I feel becomes clearer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ProcrastinateTomorrow

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 sounds a bit warped. I makes me think of dungeons, chains, whips and ball gags.

---

Think about a runner and his training partner. The training partner doesn't necessarily want to win a race during training but he will not help the training runner if he gives up immediately. Its role is to help the runner push the limits of his speed/endurance.

Aggressor-Victim sound like S&M but it's not S&M.

Think of a Victim like an Aikido master while the Aggressor is more brute force, like in Kick-boxing. Both are capable only that they use their energy differently.

Can I have some sort of real life example or how this struggle might play out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ProcrastinateTomorrow

Prone to initial doubts about intensity of own interest in another person.
How can you not know how you feel about someone ?

---

The key word here is intensity. For example, when I meet someone I know how I feel about them (for the most part), in the simple sense of like/dislike, but I don't know how they feel about me. I'm not sure how intensely I should feel about this person because I don't want to develop feelings for someone and get hurt. I'm not good at reading people as well as SEEs are so I would just wait for them to show interest in me then I would reciprocate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ProcrastinateTomorrow

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 sounds a bit warped. I makes me think of dungeons, chains, whips and ball gags.

---

I suppose it could manifest into S&M. To me this means that I'd like someone to lead the way and take the initiative, but I want to have the option to follow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ProcrastinateTomorrow

How can you not know how you feel. I know within the first 10 minutes of speaking to a person.

---

As an ILI I'm not as good at reading people as you are. :wink:

Does this make sense?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aixelsyd

For the first part, a victim type can understand that they are attracted to whoever, but will be prone to saying to themselves or to others things like "It's just a passing fancy" or "I might not like them for who they are" or "I wish I didn't feel this way/ it's just my imagination running wild."

For the second, it's hard to describe but it has little to nothing to do with S&M. It's more like the aggressor sorta drives the relationship and exterts his/her will over the victim which the victim takes as a manifestation of the intensity of the aggressor's feelings, but nonetheless, the victim is skilled at thwarting the aggressor's attempts of 'conquering' the victim (even past the preliminary stages of the relationship), thus adding the 'hard to get' aspect, which tends to make the victim appear to be a more precious 'prize' than if the victim caved in too soon or made direct confrontation. It's sort of the game of chase. The aggressor wants the victim and the victim wants to be wanted but nonetheless, the victim is liable to act in ways which add complexity to the love game aspect which both partners find exciting when there are enough 'wins' being wrought because otherwise it would become draining and a cause of much disappointment for both partners. <--Personal experience.

---

Perfect. That's exactly my idea of victim/aggressor.

I do however have problems realizing when I like someone though. I tend to be attracted to those who are attracted to me. But, this may be more Fi related.

So if someone is interested in you then automatically you are interested back ?
Does that mean you will end up with the first person who gives you a signal ?

Ah I think I get it now.

Aggressor: They are not giving me any signals, I will have to keep trying until things are 100% clear.

Victim: They are not giving me any signals, I guess that's it then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ProcrastinateTomorrow

So if someone is interested in you then automatically you are interested back ?
Does that mean you will end up with the first person who gives you a signal ?

---

I can pretty much convince myself that I'm attracted to anyone for one reason or another. Once I find out someone is interested, I think to myself "am I attracted to them?" and I can almost always find a reason. Usually the only deterrent is a good reason not to be attracted to them. I think I subject my attraction entirely to reason. "Should I or should I not be attracted to them?" rather than "am I actually attracted to them?" As I get closer it definitely moves beyond reason, but I am almost wondering how I feel and more so how the other feels.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aixelsyd
For the first part, a victim type can understand that they are attracted to whoever, but will be prone to saying to themselves or to others things like "It's just a passing fancy" or "I might not like them for who they are" or "I wish I didn't feel this way/ it's just my imagination running wild."

---

Yep.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aixelsyd

but will be prone to saying to themselves or to others things like "It's just a passing fancy" or "I might not like them for who they are" or "I wish I didn't feel this way/ it's just my imagination running wild."

---

:lol: So true.

I think: The Ni type sets up things so something can happen. The Se type takes action on the opportunities the Ni type creates.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ProcrastinateTomorrow

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 sounds a bit warped. I makes me think of dungeons, chains, whips and ball gags.

---

It's more like surrendering to the Se type's will than it is a matter of "superiority". Se types are generally more self-possessed than Ni types.

Quote:

---

How can you not know how you feel about someone ?

---

I'm very ambivalent about this unless the person is outright hostile to me. My true feelings for somebody takes years to develop, if at all. And they just change so much. I just have to have A LOT of evidence about that person in relation to a whole bunch of things before I make an opinion.

Plus I'm usually more worried about my own feelings than how I feel about somebody else (I usually do not give a shit) so there's that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sarinana

lol
oh victims are just those people who goes joking around instead of saying that this is not a joke but this is what they really want/feel/think.

---

Sounds about right, honestly even for the LIEs I know. On the contrary, SEEs are sometimes not taken seriously enough when they mean something.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joy

I think: The Ni type sets up things so something can happen. The Se type takes action on the opportunities the Ni type creates.

---

I don't really "set up things." I'm kind of lazy/don't give a shit. Still, I sort of get what you mean.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Azeroffs

I can pretty much convince myself that I'm attracted to anyone for one reason or another. Once I find out someone is interested, I think to myself "am I attracted to them?" and I can almost always find a reason. Usually the only deterrent is a good reason not to be attracted to them. I think I subject my attraction entirely to reason. "Should I or should I not be attracted to them?" rather than "am I actually attracted to them?" As I get closer it definitely moves beyond reason, but I am almost wondering how I feel and more so how the other feels.

---

Sounds similar to me; I can force the feelings (in myself) if I decide that I should be attracted to a person. (I'm :Ne: ego, though.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brilliand

Sounds similar to me; I can force the feelings (in myself) if I decide that I should be attracted to a person. (I'm :Ne: ego, though.)

---

It's not so much that I force it as much as it comes about from me thinking about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FDG

Prone to initial doubts about intensity of own interest in another person.

Not really true for me, except perhaps in a sense of "should I really try to start a relationship with this person", which isn't connected to interest or lack thereof.


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

I don't know about this, I suppose it's true in the emotional realm, where I don't really feel that confident. I won't try to change the status of the relationship and I'm a bit blind to attempts at manipulation, that can appear as a weakness somehow. I doubt though that it applies to all the other spheres of life, in Italy the culture is slightly matriarchal anyhow, I've heard ISTj males saying that in the household it's always the woman that has the upper hand, so I don't know if the above makes much sense tbh...

---

Well ENTJ is actually classified as a pseudo-aggressor/employee or whatever so meh...

_________________________________________

Psuedo-Aggressors/Employee: INTp, ENTj
These are types who exhibit aggressive tendencies in their everyday life, and as a result tend to carry over these notions and temperaments into their romantic life. They typically are not comfortable with connotations of the word "victim" - implying a certain weakness, effeteness, and lack of dignity. In searching for a partner, they are looking for a worthy opponent - someone who is strong enough to withstand their quirks without "breaking" so to speak.

Aggressors/Employer: ESFp, ISFj
These types, like the conquerors, express their sexuality openly. In daily life they may tend to be rather submissive and as a result may tend to carry over these tendencies into their romantic life. They are won over by indirect acts of submission, and are thrilled when their love interest (in the case of the "psuedo-aggressor" type) acts unlike himself. In a partner, they are looking for their equal - someone whose solid facade they can break down piece by piece.

Conquerors: ESTp, ISTj
These are assertive types who do not flinch at their own sexuality. They will express their own desire without reservation. They are won over by direct shows of submission (only after feeling that they have earned it). He will be insulted if his romantic interest gives him his title without question, and bored if the fight is too easily won. He, like the Pseudo-Aggressor and the Challenger, is questing to find his equal. Someone he can play his almost sadistic games with without "breaking."

Challengers/Prize: INFp, ENFj
These are the types who unconsciously throw a "gauntlet" down for their opponents. They know on an almost subliminal level exactly who they are looking for, and anyone who does not fit the bill will be subjected to a rather flakey, hot-cold game of courting tag. As a result, they may appear (both to others and to themselves) rather amorphous and can take on qualities of the other romantic attitudes, depending on the situation and who they are "challenging." They may, for example, give the victim half his aggressor, the psuedo-aggressor a little victim, the caregiver a bit of his child, etc. They react best, however, to those who do not "break" as a result of their games, but grant them a level of autonomy. Healthy examples of this type will have a sense of self-esteem, and may think of themselves as the "prize" that will be given only to the rightful owner.

Pseudo-Caregivers/Students: ENFp, INFj
These are types who exhibit paternal/maternal tendencies towards others in their everyday lives and may thus carry over these notions and temperaments into their romantic life. These types habitually attempt to give their partner what he/she "needs" (or what they believe they need). As a result, they may become drained by lack of attendence to their own needs and desires. In a partner, they are searching for a combination of strength and gentleness.

Teachers: ESTj, 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. Like the childlike type, he may tend to live "outside sexuality" and may have to intellectualize it in order to be comfortable. He is looking for a worthy pupil.

Childlike Types: ENTp, INTj
These types seem to exist outside their own sexuality. Sex is to be metabolized psychologically for them in an almost roundabout way - as an emotional entity, or possibly even an intellectual exercise. In a partner, they are looking for someone who will deal with (and protect) their quirks and understand their sexuality on the same intellectual/emotional level.

Caregivers: ESFj, ISFp
These are those types who openly express their need to "protect" and care for their romantic interest. In conversation may often lend a sympathetic ear (which, depending on the person, may be interpreted as insincerity, but it's exactly what the Child-like type is looking for). They are looking for someone who will not only accept their paternal/maternal tendencies, but welcome and thrive on it.




Lefty
ENFJ
4w5
Challenger/Prize

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by polikujm

I don't really "set up things." I'm kind of lazy/don't give a shit. Still, I sort of get what you mean.

---

lol

Lefty
ENFJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brilliand

Sounds similar to me; I can force the feelings (in myself) if I decide that I should be attracted to a person. (I'm :Ne: ego, though.)

---

titititititititititi :love: love LII's...:-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ProcrastinateTomorrow

Can I have some examples or scenarios to help me understand these two and help me clear some things up.

Prone to initial doubts about intensity of own interest in another person.
How can you not know how you feel about someone ?

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 sounds a bit warped. I makes me think of dungeons, chains, whips and ball gags.

---

When I first met my inspector he came on strong, but I knew right then I had met my match and it pissed me off at first. Later I came to enjoy feeling possessed or "conquered."

At the onset he absolutely hade the upper hand and then I started challenging him and it resulted in very interesting conversations with covert meaning and speaking a lot and saying very little and him being evasive and me fleeing (combined with watching each other from a distance - him smerky me suspicious). Till eventually I warmed up to him and started giving in and then going to find him where he kind of 1,2 seduced me just right and made me laugh my ass off - and its love...although I don't say it I just show it - He says it, though.

"For one human being to love another: that is perhaps the most difficult of our tasks; the ultimate, the last test and proof, the work for which all other work is but preparation," Rainer Maria Rilke


Lefty
ENFJ
4w5
Challenger/Prize

w/ her
ISTJ
6w5 / 6w7
Conqueror xoxoxoxo (sigh)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by leftylib

When I first met my inspector he came on strong, but I knew right then I had met my match and it pissed me off at first. Later I came to enjoy feeling possessed or "conquered."

At the onset he absolutely hade the upper hand and then I started challenging him and it resulted in very interesting conversations with covert meaning and speaking a lot and saying very little and him being evasive and me fleeing (combined with watching each other from a distance - him smerky me suspicious). Till eventually I warmed up to him and started giving in and then going to find him where he kind of 1,2 seduced me just right and made me laugh my ass off - and its love...although I don't say it I just show it - He says it, though.

---

Very envy-worthy scenario. Sounds amazing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by octopuslove

Wow leftylib, those descriptions look better than any other ones I've seen, where are they from? Your situation sounds awesome :D

---

yeah, where'd you find those descriptions?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by leftylib

Childlike Types: ENTp, INTj
These types seem to exist outside their own sexuality. Sex is to be metabolized psychologically for them in an almost roundabout way - as an emotional entity, or possibly even an intellectual exercise. In a partner, they are looking for someone who will deal with (and protect) their quirks and understand their sexuality on the same intellectual/emotional level.

---

That description is so me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by leftylib

Psuedo-Aggressors/Employee: INTp, ENTj
These are types who exhibit aggressive tendencies in their everyday life, and as a result tend to carry over these notions and temperaments into their romantic life. They typically are not comfortable with connotations of the word "victim" - implying a certain weakness, effeteness, and lack of dignity. In searching for a partner, they are looking for a worthy opponent - someone who is strong enough to withstand their quirks without "breaking" so to speak.

Aggressors/Employer: ESFp, ISFj
These types, like the conquerors, express their sexuality openly. In daily life they may tend to be rather submissive and as a result may tend to carry over these tendencies into their romantic life. They are won over by indirect acts of submission, and are thrilled when their love interest (in the case of the "psuedo-aggressor" type) acts unlike himself. In a partner, they are looking for their equal - someone whose solid facade they can break down piece by piece.

---

I disagree with the parts in bold and am not sure I understand the bit that's underlined.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by leftylib

Conquerors: ESTp, ISTj
These are assertive types who do not flinch at their own sexuality. They will express their own desire without reservation. They are won over by direct shows of submission (only after feeling that they have earned it). He will be insulted if his romantic interest gives him his title without question, and bored if the fight is too easily won. He, like the Pseudo-Aggressor and the Challenger, is questing to find his equal. Someone he can play his almost sadistic games with without "breaking."

Challengers/Prize: INFp, ENFj
These are the types who unconsciously throw a "gauntlet" down for their opponents. They know on an almost subliminal level exactly who they are looking for, and anyone who does not fit the bill will be subjected to a rather flakey, hot-cold game of courting tag. As a result, they may appear (both to others and to themselves) rather amorphous and can take on qualities of the other romantic attitudes, depending on the situation and who they are "challenging." They may, for example, give the victim half his aggressor, the psuedo-aggressor a little victim, the caregiver a bit of his child, etc. They react best, however, to those who do not "break" as a result of their games, but grant them a level of autonomy. Healthy examples of this type will have a sense of self-esteem, and may think of themselves as the "prize" that will be given only to the rightful owner.

---

Hmmm... it's difficult to think of myself as a prize, since society conditions me to think of a male the "prize-winner" and a female as the "prize" (even though that's really, really sexist), but all in all, these descriptions sound fun. Every relationship needs a bit of back-and-forth. According to this, I want someone who will put up with me being ridiculous, and maybe be entertained by it or enjoy it, no? Sounds legit. I don't know that I want to be conquered necessarily, and I don't know how to give a direct show of submission... but maybe that's my relational inexperience showing, as opposed to any socionics-related thing. In any case, these descriptions sound much more accurate than the others I've read.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by silverchris9

I don't know that I want to be conquered necessarily

---

Ok, let me reformulate that for you.
Do you want to be so awesome that women will start to hit on you and try to capture your attention?

k, it works for me now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ProcrastinateTomorrow

Prone to initial doubts about intensity of own interest in another person.
How can you not know how you feel about someone ?[B]

---

breathe's analysis is pretty good.

Also, it's not so much that they don't know how they feel about someone, but that they don't know how intense the feeling is. That is, they don't know if it's love, lust, or perhaps neither. As the relationship draws on, many feel more comfortable.

Quote:

---

I makes me think of dungeons, chains, whips and ball gags.

---

Rather than that being what it describes, what you describe is an example of an aggressor/victim relationship in play. A very, very stereotypical example of it; essentially a caricature.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by strrrng

Yeah, that's pretty much bullshit. I establish very strong feelings of attraction/repulsion to people and things on immediate encounter. And it's not random impulse shit, either; I know exactly where the feelings arise from and why they do so. It's like a working barometer that's constantly being tweaked with each new stimulus encountered. There's always something subtle yet salient about a person, an underlying quality reaching out, that strongly points one way or the other for me. If I don't have this kind of reaction to a person, it's usually a sign that they are uninteresting.

---

Maybe it's more Gamma aggressor/victim relations.

Hey, by the way, are you still considering LSI as a possibility or do you definitely see yourself as an IEI.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FDG

Prone to initial doubts about intensity of own interest in another person.

Not really true for me

---

That's because you're not a Victim, you're an Aggressor.