Is there any?
Printable View
Is there any?
Roughly, yes. I think so.
Ezra. <3
Depends what do you understand under domination and submission.
I think maybe there is a correlation, but I don't think it's always a matter of Type A is dominant, Type B is submissive. I think gender plays a role too, for example Type A is dominant when male, but submissive when female, perhaps because that is the social convention. Type B is submissive when male, dominant when female, perhaps because it is against social conventions. Obviously, I am speaking in absolutes right now, but it is never so.
IMO, its Aggressors/Victims, how far they go with dominance/submission depends on other factors besides Socionics. When I was married, my ex and I watched the beginning of Fatal Attraction at the Theater. The aggressive love scenes grossed me out. Fortunately, my ex was ESE, Caregiver-type, and he was turned off too, and suggested we leave. I was glad. Only movie we ever walked out of. We went to the movie next store (which is actually another story). Anyway back at work, some of my colleagues at lunch were gushing about the love scenes in this movie. Seriously? That was a puzzle to me. I am sure that normal love for Aggressors/Victims does not go this far! This was the kinky version of that, Aggressor/Victim gone severe, in great drama. I think that perhaps it was aggressor or victim types that did not mind these scenes, like a caregiver/child-like type would..
In case you haven't seen this yet: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...otic-Attitudes
It's not even straight sex to begin with, so I take it 'homos' voted positively. Anyway, I'm not sure there is some kind of link between such practices and sociotype.
What is OP asking here anyway? Does OP know what he is talking about?
I'm not really sure about that as well.
EDIT: Hmm, I see Eliza posted the erotic attitudes to support her claim. Time to "blame" Se/Ni for it - fine with me.
I remember this poll... I think it's really funny that caregivers were for the most part no, but infantiles were evenly split.Quote:
Originally Posted by lungs
Sexually it depends whether you're into beatings and waking up with a black eye in bed in the morning. Same with urinating and defecating on your partner. Humiliation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Taknamay
It doesn't necessarily have to end up violently, focusing mostly on bondage and discipline. So I think what is allowed is between participants to agree on, that is, what turns them on.
And this is the reason, I'm having a bit of trouble(?) actually replying in this thread, for I don't know what is OP talking about at all.
Are you into any kind of stuff I wrote about, Taknamay?
I wonder whether you might be a masochist, if yes. All in all, it is not really sex as in straight sex.
Of course I am not a masochist, and you are a sick pervert for even suggesting such a thing. Please never speak to me again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Absurd
Are you referring to the sex scene in the kitchen?Quote:
Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason
I am seeing this this two months later, its been that long since I have been online. Yes, I am pretty sure it was in the kitchen. Didn't see the whole movie though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kim
This one?Quote:
Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason
FTR Correlation doesn't mean causation.
Not very relevant imo. I understood bdsm to refer to something further than just being dominant or submissive, and that poll didn't offer a choice between the two.Quote:
Originally Posted by lungs
Nothing wrong with that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kim
Ezra was here?
No one would ever refer to my colleagues as clucking hens so you are wrong about that. And if in your eyes not being into violent sex makes one "prudish", then go ahead and call me prudish. I'll take that from you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jadae16t
Chosen social convention?? I thought we are talking about sex. That's not a social activity for me. I see it as more of a private thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jadae16t
Prudes prudes everywhere.
Non-social sex equals no pillow or dirty talk?
Missionary position for purity ya'll YOLO.
I would have liked to see more hair pulling myself.Quote:
Originally Posted by nigh
But you used sex to make a claim about types ("aggressor sex"). I don't think your attitude towards a sex scene is indicative of your type, but you made the claim that it is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason
i was confused too, but i didn't watch the whole thing so i thought maybe there was something i missed.
Not sure I am following you. "Used Sex"? I am not saying that domination/submission is what aggressor types do. I said it "depends on other factors besides Socionics." It seems to me that Aggressor/Victim types would be less uncomfortable with a drama about Domination/Submission. Just an opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kim
@nigh, I didn't click on the scene when it was posted in the thread so I can't comment on it. I trust my initial reaction to the movie and won't honor it with another viewing. :) But if the scene posted here was not aggressive, then it must not have been the scene I walked out on, anyway. That one was some early-on scene, notorious for its violence and/or aggression.
@Eliza Thomason, you make a point about your reaction to a particular scene and its connection to erotic attitudes and you can't quickly click and look at the first two seconds to confirm that this is the scene you are talking about? If you want to talk about your perception of aggressor sexual behavior, it would really help to know what you label aggressive.
And this is what you said earlier in the thread:
If we are talking about the same scene, we could have a poll about how forum members react to it based on type. Yay polls!Quote:
This was the kinky version of that, Aggressor/Victim gone severe, in great drama. I think that perhaps it was aggressor or victim types that did not mind these scenes, like a caregiver/child-like type would..
I feel BDSM and the community is very Delta oriented from the people I've known in that community.
One thing is that Delta does not experience :Si: the same as Alpha's. :Si: isn't just comfort but resilience and toughness, and one way Delta can deal with :Si: is testing their resilience and toughness or building it up. BDSM fulfills some of these sensory desires while at the same time providing a channel for ID experiences of Delta ST's(they have :Se: in the ID) and Super-Ego experiences of Delta NF's without the consequences of social criticism.
BDSM is a way to experience many power dynamics from the safety of one's bedroom without every having to deal with social mores or input. Also the practices and methodology of the BDSM fetishize the equipment, the tools and technology of the experience so to speak. It is a very practical fetish.
There is also the establishment of safety techniques such as "safe" words and various methods which keep the experience voluntary and in a way ethical and moral.
Now this is not to say other individual don't engage in behavior that is rough and can appear like BDSM, but imo it's not the same as the community. David Carradine dying hung in a closet in sexual asphyxiation situation is BDSM-like but imo doesn't fall under what people know today as the BDSM community.
The key to BDSM is that it's fetishistic and a fixation. Fixations are formed from repression not expression and formed often from super-ego repression.
Power dynamics within aggressor/victim sexual behavior isn't repressed, it is in a way normal, there is no need to ritualized it or make it "safe". Also often within BDSM, the Dom is the pleasure giver while the Sub is the pleasure recipient. Whatever pain is felt is simply spice for the experience. This is more a giver/recipient experience than aggressor/victim.
Also why did I focus on Delta and not Alpha, Alpha Si is pretty averse to pain or even the implication of pain. Alphas may fixate on power dynamics in a different way however as these are repressed traits for them as well.
That scene just looks like normal sex when you're a bit horny :S
Aren't Deltas legendary in BDSM circles with their 'the lifestyle' shenanigans?
OkQuote:
Originally Posted by Jadae16t
This thread is one fluster cluck.
lmfaoQuote:
Originally Posted by mfckr
I had to sign in just so I could post in this thread with a giant lmao
LMAO
Yous Guys.
hkkr that all sounds very intelligent and I couldn't say if there is anything to it. Personally I have a very low pain tolerance. It just sounds messed up to me and any type can be messed up. Even great actors like Carradine. How horrifyingly pitiful that was. Nothing like having your death be an education in freakishness for millions, and your life be remembered for that.
Well David Carradine's behavior isn't BDSM, but simply bondage, the S/M power dynamics are not relevant to his private self-bondage death.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason
In the BDSM dynamic, a individual does not need to enjoy pain to participate. It only requires one partner to enjoy that form of arousal.
Also imo, Fatal Attraction is not BDSM either.
IMO, BDSM is about repressed expression of normal power structures that exist in day to day life, such as boss to secretary(there is actually a movie about this starring Maggie Gyllenhaal called secretary). The relationship portrayed is loving supposedly natural and fulfilling.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secretary_(film)
This is a more representative film imo of what the BDSM community is attempting to achieve. The movie basically sanitizes a BDSM relationship and there is no resistance.
In aggressor victim relationships, there is a implicit resistance on the part of a victim, and that resistance is overpowered by the aggressor, in this way both achieve what they desire. In caregiver/infantile relations it's more about giving each other what each other desires even if it's pain or dominance.
There is also the fetishistic aspect of bondage which is tools oriented and equipment oriented. Also procedural rituals and scripts are crafted to expressed otherwise repressed emotions and create a power hierarchy. However often in these relations the power dynamic is reversed because the person receiving pain and submitting is the one receiving pleasure while the individual who is in the dominant position is simply working really hard at it.
I wouldn't confuse true psychopathic behavior with BDSM either, as these are worlds apart. BDSM is ultimately voluntary.
There are certain more psychopathic sadists out there but as a whole they would not fit in in society, their behavior don't fall under BDSM.
For example someone like the BTK killer, who I type LSI
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_Rader
the movie secretary is a really cute delta movie. :love:
IME...
generally dominant (e.g. "do things i tell you to do/here, do this, this is good")
LSE, SLE, ESE, SLI, SEI
generally submissive (i.e. "tell me things i can do to please you/i have no idea what i'm doing"):
EII, [IEI], IEE
kind of dominant but not really (i.e. "you do all the work, i'll just sit here and groan at the right moments"):
ILI, LII, LSI, [ILE], LIE, [IEI]
kind of submissive but not really (i.e. "mmm yeah you like that? you like that don't you? how about this? how about now? what about this?")
EIE, SEE, [ILE]
haven't had much sexual experience with ESIs to know for sure.
I imagine this and only thisQuote:
Originally Posted by Radio
http://www.angelfoodcomic.com/wp-con...I-am-doing.jpg
my esi ex was very dominant but in spite of the running joke(?) among some here that i'm a dominatrix i'm more on the submissive side. maybe gender roles, maybe personal idiosyncrasies.
that last category ("kind of submissive but not really") is annoying as FUCK but the guy i was with who was like that i type lse actually. idk i could see it as a caregiver thing too if you wanna do labels.
My ILI ex had absolutely no sex drive. Type-related? Probably sure.
Gender roles definitely play hugely. And LSEs may be dominant but not in the traditionally dominant way... IME they really are caregivers after all.
I am continually surprised by how submissive LSEs can be, the Si-subtype at least. In my experience they are often the ones to initiate things, but I take if from there. Could be just me-related, tho. *shrug*
i DO.Quote:
Originally Posted by mfckr
:wave:
This is the only part of your post I don't find constructive; trying to type "sociopaths" (not in the light way it is used in this forum to describe SLEs but like serial killers) is always a bad idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by hkkmr
i.e. I would type this particular killer LII. I did read your wiki article but my typing is also influenced by how I view beta Se, and how I view alpha Ne. Better to say psychos are just psychos, right?
herpa derps doesn't equal deprssisperdkp afskdhfhQuote:
Originally Posted by JWC3
.Quote:
Originally Posted by sssonyyy
There are plenty of other types of sociopaths and they're all quite different. You can believe what you want. This is a individual that also attained a lot of social positions outside of his psychopathy, such cub scout leader, church deacon and various other positions of authority. He was overzealous and extremely strict. He took a lot of pride in the agency of his killing and his life.
Taking away his psychopathy, he still acts like a LSI imo, as he was able to fool almost everyone with his persona/mask until he was caught. The ego is more or less persona.
Fluster cuck. Like a flustered cuckold. OHOHOHO SO CLEVERQuote:
Originally Posted by Park
I think ENTj want to dominate and ISFj like being dominated.
I don't relate to it so I'm not a type that likes this sort of thing.
This is interesting. Even if I like to be dominant in sex, this focus on the sensation or whatever... that's totally alien to me. I see that with Si. They like the pain. But what about the power dynamic? They don't like that?Quote:
Originally Posted by hkkmr
Yep, I totally agree, ha. I think it's a pile of bullshit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Starfall
There is no need to keep it secret, I am also a histrionic nymphomaniac ablutophile.
I think deltas are into bdsm as well. I've heard IEE's and EII's talking about how they do fuckin wierd shit like put needles in eachothers' skin and wear masks. Buncha aliens coming down to earth in their space ship and fuckin eachother.
At least I keep things human. Forget all those wierd props.
Just rape.
Just my raw observations : E_TJ likes to dominate, I--p is submissive, Ij and E_fj are a bit of a combo, like to switch. Dunno about Se ...it appears forceful, but I actually think Se creatives (Rationals) are more likely to be into bdsm stuff , while Se base likes to chill with "pure", less calculated sensations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ezra
I think keeping socionics out of the bedroom makes for much better sex. Really, you should try it! :popcorn:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kim
Do not take away my pervert teacher/pupil role-games!
Those are not type-related. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by DaftPunk
they are: caregiver/infantileQuote:
Originally Posted by Kim
I hope i'll be able to convince my LSI partner not to stick to system next time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kim
What, I have to be the pupil now?Quote:
Originally Posted by DaftPunk
:oops: yay. But it's like with the big and small spoon everyone wants to be the small spoon some time :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Kim
Heck no. I...p are very dominating. ISTj are dominating, INFj are submissive but they can role play lolQuote:
Originally Posted by AshSun
Wait, was this a pun?Quote:
Originally Posted by EzraIs there any?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radio
he roughly thinks , doesn't countQuote:
Originally Posted by Aquagraph
I dont know about the other quadras and bdsmbbut i know that as a beta enfj i have a strong appreciation for the qualities of my dual especially strict self discipline. i also enjoy the challenge they pose in terms of getting close to them.
In sex, I tend to be extremely submissive, even passive. Perhaps this isn't something someone would expect from me given my manner of communication on a regular basis. A lot of people who see me don't know that I'm gay, and after that don't know that I'm interested in sex outside of a relationship until I tell them so.
I tend to really appreciate a dominant partner who does things to me that I don't want done, explicitly - - but really I do want them. I'm just not saying it out loud. Woe betide the person who does something I don't like lol. Truth be told I am pretty lazy usually and simply like to receive pleasure from a partner. Luckily I've had some who were very happy to get themselves off and didn't care that I was me.
The I'm not going to tell you what I want so you'll have to figure it out yourself and give me this thing I seemingly don't want is probably the central idea here, at least for me.
Edit: In some situations, I have been willing to take the dominant role. I'm not sure why that happened. All I know is that it happened with a couple of SEEs I used to know.
You're not the first girl to mention that. If only certain attractive Se dom males felt the way you do. Lol. Sigh. My loveless life. No matter.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ankh
Edit: This made me think of something regarding attraction. It's occurred to me recently that there have been people who wanted me, and I ignored them because I didn't know it. I guess that's why I require strong Se. If someone doesn't show me very openly and consistently their attraction, I don't see it or feel it. "Oh, this person likes me? I had no idea."
I understand. I tend to be the type of person who can approach most people. I often get tired of it though and want someone willing to do that for me. It takes a lot of energy really. I have met a couple estp guys who made me feel the , "we're not worthy!" feeling. Those were more difficult.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ankh
Edit: I've also met some who were outright scary. Lol.
That's one reason I've wondered about my type somewhat. It takes a less attractive SEE for me to feel sexually magnetized. For an estp, it takes quite a bit more physical supremity for me to feel the same way. This tends to allow me to be more realistic with what league I'm in. It seems to reason to me that with compatible socionics types, there is less of a need for purely physical aspects to make up for a psychological deficit, if that makes sense. So how does sexual attraction correlate to intertype relations? There is probably a thread on that.
Check the BDSM thread. You will wind your quadra mates.Quote:
Originally Posted by leftylib
Sex ... naturally has a mix of domination and submission from both sides. You may go overboard in dominance, and that works for a while, but then the energy from that begins wearing off... then you go back and be a little submissive for a time... it keeps switching. I don't really think of people as "Dominant" or "Submissive"
i think this might be more true for irrationals. not just in sex but everything, i tend to think if somethings comfortable and my partner enjoys it i'll keep it up, cuz that makes sense. i think irrationals need things to be switched around or spiced up more and its confusing cuz it can seem like theyre never just fucking happy.Quote:
Originally Posted by rat1
Realistically, I'm able to overpower most white boys and be the dominant one. However thuggish latinos and black guys tend to be the ones that fuck me. Believe it or not, despite my GAY GAY GAY GAY GAY GAY ness, I'm about 75% top... as not too many men have the balls or strength to top me.
if this generalization were true, there wouldn´t be a whole bunch of ppl into bdsm ...which , in my (not all-encompassing) experience, is rather preferred by Rationals.Quote:
Originally Posted by rat1
Can confirm this generalization on my part, I guess. I have a preferred set(s) in sexual MO's (lol I sound like a rapist) but I guess I also feel pretty fluid with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by lungs
Yeah I suppose there is a superficial personality which is more or less dominant. Thats is superficial, though
WHenever I see someone who's presenting just a purely dominant personality, like a thug, they make me laugh because I can see they're being illegitimate. No one feels like scarface ALL the time...
People do get really caught up in their delusion of themselves... and there are many reasons why people develop the masks they do.
I just prefer people take off their masks... it's more intimate and more fulfilling... yeah, I suppose it is just my personal preference.
I can only have sex on a silk bed with roses while listening to barry white's soothing baritone voice.
I agree completely... I can take the mean mugging, thug persona for a little while, before I lose interest. To me, what is attractive is a multidimensional personality. Dynamic...flowing.Quote:
Originally Posted by rat1
Sex for me is a multidimensional experience... I would rather be all in or all out. I will no longer pretend to have a good time 'cause I think it will keep the guy interested. I have new ways to keep interest. I want it to flow and if I am dominant at first I don't mind having it switched up on me.
Edit: lol @ why I posted this.
This happens when you have psychological issues that haven't been expressed / your partner isn't aware of.... it makes you stuck in the certain energy.Quote:
Originally Posted by lungs
how did you come up with this? whats the logic?Quote:
Originally Posted by rat1
Why do you think rape victims become extremely passive in bed, and they need to be dominated? Why do you think they end up with abusers time and again?Quote:
Originally Posted by lungs
i don't think this applies to all rape survivors, let alone all people in general. we have different opinions about generalizing though. i agree that sex and psychological issues are linked and maybe there are strong trends but i just don't see what it necessarily has to do with me.Quote:
Originally Posted by rat1
Only you know your sexual issues and motives.
...
Hahaha, okay a good friend and I like to laugh at these from Craigslist, cause we roll like that. When I saw it I immediately thought of this thread.
Rough Sex With A Nice Guy... - m4w - 29
Seeking a safe, sane and open minded gal to get together with on a sem- regular basis. Someone drama free, with a busy life, and sensible.
Hoping for a play partner to explore with, play with and work out similar kinks. Perhaps a closeted deviant. Someone who enjoys sex of the rough variety.
From hair-pulling, to a little choking, cloths ripping, holding you down, against the wall.. a little slapping, and a little humiliation play if you are into that.
Nothing is demanded and nothing is expected. If the mood is not there, I am versed in a wide variety of relevant social topics for deep conversations. I am also usually typically hungry too, especially after post-coital activities, so if you are foodie, we can always check out some new place to eat. ( If you take pictures of your food for your facebook though, I shall probably not call you again )
I am 5"8 with brown eyes and dark hair, I do try to work out regularly, above average dress, enjoys my laughs and my kinks.
Hoping you might be a female version of me, and would like to explore something along the lines of above, please send me an email.
Include a picture and what you like or I'll take it you are spam.
Please put Rough sex in subject
Thanks for reading.
@Ezra @leftylib and whoever... you should study this theory, it might yield some insights into your inquiries...
I'm very submissive, but never in a give up, lie back and do everything you want me to do powerless way. I like power stuggles, provoking, fighting and to be overpowered in the end. I love to fight back and I'm not gentle. The whole process of being wanted and overpowered is a key ingredient, othewise it's just blah. Any sort of caregiver giggling type of sex – does not compute.
BDSM as a lifestyle is not my thing, too unnatural and cheesy.
As far as other types, SLE's are by far the most dominating, from what I've seen. Differences are not that clean cut though, gender influence is too strong.
Dominant, submissive, who cares? Just have fun, enjoy.
I remember from the time I was a teenager until I was in my early twenties, I used to be a bit more romantic and would include music, flowers, candles, oils, etc every once in a while. It was about sensory experience and emotional intensity. Trying to find somewhere to have sex without getting caught was a bit of a thrill.
Now-a-days, sex is contingent on the kids being preoccupied(are the kids watching a movie? Bedroom...Quick!! Bathroom, shower, anything will do), OR us not falling asleep too soon after they fall asleep. Every now and again I do a romantic night with a nice dinner and atmosphere, but not as often as I used to.
I've been considering this topic for awhile. For the most part I find BDSM to be a bit on the boring side. However, I would say that I'm naturally expressive as a dominant in my everyday life. I find that I can make girls submit to me pretty easily given the right circumstances. I lead a crew of girls once on a job and had some of them calling me Daddy by the end of the first week. I quite enjoyed acting the authoritarian dictator who was also sweet to them after barking out orders. I'm not Chad Thundercock straight man dominant though I am physically imposing in that way. I think if I were to gravitate to a particular BDSM relationship it would be DD/lg (minus the infantilization aspect that some subs get into) or something similar because of the power play that arises from me being both authoritative and sadistic as well as compassionate and playful. The feeling of having total control over someone built over time is quite exciting. The incestuous taboo play of that particular relationship is fun and psychologically stimulating. As with everything I also think in terms of opposites so I also have a more masochistic and submissive side that I don't automatically dive into unless with someone I trust who can bring that out of me and can play with the tensions of the two inclinations. A partner who can be both submissive and dominant is a keeper. The idea of ownership of someone is really appealing but mutual ownership? Divine. All this is wrought with resistance, fights, competition, and attempts at overpowering one another. The one thing I can't stand is permanent role play. I love switching things up and undermining shit to keep things fresh.
I also enjoy deep intimate moments of peace and love without all this pretense to power play and the like.