Imbalance in romantic relationships of benefit

I am mainly interested in hearing from people who have experience with being the benefactor in a romantic relationship. Do you think you loved your beneficiary as strongly as you could have loved anyone else? Did you feel like you were settling?

Would be interested to hear from beneficiaries too--did you feel like there was an imbalance? Did you feel secure in your relationship? Did any of you have the upper hand? How do you think your benefactor partner felt?

I've dated one SEI (maybe two, not sure what my high school ex is) and more than my fair share of ILIs. With my two most serious candidate ILIs, I think one I liked more than he liked me, and the other vice versa. The one who liked me more than I liked him, I think we were just on such uneven ground in terms of social standing that it outweighed the asymmetry of the type relation.

The SEI and I kind of both didn't like each other that much. I have wonderful SEI friends and like them a lot but am not usually sufficiently attracted to them to start dating them. I'm much more prone to attraction toward ILIs and adore my ILI friends and seem closer to them maybe. But I suppose that's normal for benefit relations... I do have an ILI friend with whom all our mutual friends are like "why don't you date Economist?!" but he's just like eh.

Can benefit/how often does benefit work for marriage? What attitudes/mindsets are necessary for the benefactor or beneficiary to adopt to make it work?

PoLR + suggestive just seems like a lot to overcome (on one hand it is a mutual weakness, on the other a continual source of disappointment)

of course, that's only theory--anything is possible

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Economist

Can benefit/how often does benefit work for marriage? What attitudes/mindsets are necessary for the benefactor or beneficiary to adopt to make it work?

---

It can. But it will not necessarily be a good marriage. I know one ILE+EIE couple. I don't consider them to be happy together. But they've been together 15 years.

Haven't seen any other benefit couples.

I think the only relationships worth being in are quadra+semidual. So there we already have 5 combinations. That's it. That's what we see all around us from people who just go by instinct and know nothing about socionics.

I've dated EII. One was for 6 months. There were all kinds of feelings of imbalance and disappointment, coming from nowhere. Not beeing "seen" and so on. It "should" have worked, but it didn't. Hard to put it into words when it's mostly from these functional factors that we can't escape.

I've never been as attracted to an LII as they were to me. I cannot ever see it happening. I'm also the Ni subtype, so when a guy is Se PoLR, it will be rather unattractive to me on a romantic basis. It is not repulsive, but it is simply a clear lack of romantic interest. LIIs are strictly great "mind partners" for me, in the sense that the mental connection can be quite good, better than with any other type possibly. But only getting mental stimulation is not enough for a romantic relationship for me (in other words, I am not "sapiosexual" enough for that); that's better for friendship.

I know of several IEI-Fe people dating LIIs however, and it seems like several of them do get married. (I find subtype matters quite a lot in Benefit, and probably in Supervision too – it creates a bridge between the types and slightly outweighs the imbalance. The subtype of the Benefactor and Supervisor both seem to matter more.) I know of an IEI-Fe female who's been married to her LII-Ti husband for a rather long time, and she seems happy enough. She once talked about her struggles with the LII some time into the relationship; I'm assuming she had to get over the fact that her husband won't fulfill certain expectations she has, etc.

I find it interesting to note that all longterm Benefit marriages I have known or observed were with a female Benefactor (and usually matching subtypes). It's typically women who've had negative experiences in the past, and/or who feel more comfortable being with a guy who's unlikely going to leave them because of the asymmetric dynamic. Often it is said that the one who cares more has the power, and that is certainly the case with the Benefactor; the Beneficiary cares more, so the Benefactor has more power. I am assuming that when a guy is the Benefactor, he's more likely going to tire of it and his eyes will wander, and that's why there aren't too many long-term Benefit relationships with a male Benefactor.

Anyhow, I do think that Benefit marriages can and do work. It typically requires a female Benefactor, matching subtypes, and being able to accept and overlook the Beneficiary's shortcomings.

When it comes to me being a Beneficiary, I surely have been attracted to a good share of ESIs in the past. It never lead to anywhere (with the guys). I've also had several ESI female friends and acquaintances. The ESIs usually positioned themselves as someone who knows better than I do or who has more/better experience than I do, or who's my protector in a way and takes me under their wing at certain moments. It is not uncommon for some ESIs to find me somewhat silly or not particularly worthy of attention at first. Two ESI 9 friends have just discarded me once I did "something wrong" in their eyes... I do feel the imbalance on some level. I often admire them more than they admire me. Since I have become aware of this dynamic, I've become more critical of ESIs and I don't really crush on them anymore, for the most part. It would be kind of doomed anyway.

Seen EIEs that are looking for logical beat down. All over me like mosquitos just to get more of it. Weird. That said they are their one of own kinds and pretty cool in some ways.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by unsuccessfull Alphamale

Seen EIEs that are looking for logical beat down. All over me like mosquitos just to get more of it. Weird. That said they are their one of own kinds and pretty cool in some ways.

---

Ah, so the odd thing/dilemma is: they look for their dual or what their dual does (logical: :Ti: - beatdown: :Se:) and get a dose of their demonstrative instead, which is also confusing because it's their dual's PoLR :lol: Meanwhile, your creative keeps them sort of hooked and attracted but not fulfilled because of the other different valued functions.

I place relations of benefit near the bottom for success potential simply because we never seem to be on the same path. Any well-meaning advice is usually not acted upon; it can trigger alternate thought processes but that can be done by any type. The IEIs that I knew were rather into themselves and their images with limited horizons; LIIs are also islands onto themselves but for different reasons. The only advice I received from them was on my public image/approach, which I thought were irrelevant to the issues. SLIs often peg me as too theoretical to be useful and too much of a perfectionist. Whenever I offered them advice, they went off and did their own thing so I usually felt a certain amount of frustration.

a.k.a. I/O

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chae

Ah, so the odd thing/dilemma is: they look for their dual or what their dual does (logical: :Ti: - beatdown: :Se:) and get a dose of their demonstrative instead, which is also confusing because it's their dual's PoLR :lol: Meanwhile, your creative keeps them sort of hooked and attracted but not fulfilled because of the other different valued functions.

---

I think LIE's also appreciate if you show them relation with tight boundaries.
[Just saw my dad with his ESI friend. It was immediate call out for attention :Se:+ towards him [ESI] (irritates and scares me). Active and strong :Se:- is far easier to deal with. ]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by unsuccessfull Alphamale

I think LIE's also appreciate if you show them relation with tight boundaries.
[Just saw my dad with his ESI friend. It was immediate call out for attention :Se:+ towards him [ESI] (irritates and scares me). Active and strong :Se:- is far easier to deal with. ]

---

Yes, for instance, I've seen @Adam Strange in need of that, and also open to it.
Indeed :thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Medusa

I find it interesting to note that all longterm Benefit marriages I have known or observed were with a female Benefactor (and usually matching subtypes). It's typically women who've had negative experiences in the past, and/or who feel more comfortable being with a guy who's unlikely going to leave them because of the asymmetric dynamic. Often it is said that the one who cares more has the power, and that is certainly the case with the Benefactor; the Beneficiary cares more, so the Benefactor has more power. I am assuming that when a guy is the Benefactor, he's more likely going to tire of it and his eyes will wander, and that's why there aren't too many long-term Benefit relationships with a male Benefactor.

Anyhow, I do think that Benefit marriages can and do work. It typically requires a female Benefactor, matching subtypes, and being able to accept and overlook the Beneficiary's shortcomings.

---

This is a really good point I hadn't thought of before. The only long-term romantic benefit relationship I know is a female EII with male SEI. I wonder if kind of the inverse is true. Since on average, women tend to like long-term things more than men do, and men tend to like short-term things more than women do, such that men have more market power in the marriage market while women have more market power in the casual fling market, maybe male benefactor-female beneficiary is more common for flings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by unsuccessfull Alphamale

I think LIE's also appreciate if you show them relation with tight boundaries.
[Just saw my dad with his ESI friend. It was immediate call out for attention :Se:+ towards him [ESI] (irritates and scares me). Active and strong :Se:- is far easier to deal with. ]

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chae

Yes, for instance, I've seen @Adam Strange in need of that, and also open to it.
Indeed :thumbsup:

---

Not to derail this thread, @Chae, but I'm curious about what it was that you saw. I've been thinking about my romantic relationships recently, in particular about how I seem to need a challenge to keep my interest, and I'm looking for another perspective on what I do.

You can reply in PM so as not to derail this thread further.

I have not been in a romantic relationship with a Benefactor, but I like every one that I've met. They are fun and quite sexy, but I have found that if I respond naturally to them (as an LIE), they quickly shut down their friendliness. The only way I've found to keep them going is to not respond to them at all. I'm pretty sure that's how their dual, the SLI, responds to them.

I've mentioned before that my SLI ex-wife's sister is her dual, an IEE (my Benefactor).

When my wife and I decided to get married, she took me around to everyone in her family to introduce me, and on this particular weekend, it was the IEE sister's turn.
I liked her immediately, and since it was winter and I needed snow boots, I asked her if she'd guide me to a store where I could buy a pair. We got into the car, with her driving, and I found that I really, really liked her energy and her friendliness and her sensibility, and as we were driving, I suddenly realized that she was misinterpreting my attention. She was thinking that I might be coming on to her, and what kind of a rat comes on to his fiance's sister?
Lol.
I made it clear that I looked at her like a guy buddy, not as a potential date, and then I started to wonder what kind of guys she had been dating which would make her immediately think that way?

For the record, I like every female Benefactor I've met, and I like them well enough to prefer them to be close, at arm's length, and I also realize that our differences are great enough so they should be held away, at arm's length. In other words, arm's length is the optimum distance.

Also, I've never been tempted to start a relationship with my Beneficiary, the SLE, despite their being Sexual Aggressors and having loads of Se. I don't know why not. I think they are fun, bouncy, intelligent, perceptive, deeply sensitive, and athletic. On paper that sounds somewhat like an ESI-Se, but the differences are enough to place them outside my romance zone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adam Strange

Not to derail this thread, @Chae, but I'm curious about what it was that you saw. I've been thinking about my romantic relationships recently, in particular about how I seem to need a challenge to keep my interest, and I'm looking for another perspective on what I do.

You can reply in PM so as not to derail this thread further.

---

No no it's alright, it still has relevance as far as benefit dynamics go. I noticed that you do well being advised what is right for you to do and what isn't, you might even listen to condemnation and scolding without any factual basis, just based on power pressuring. Strictness appeals to you rather than has an upsetting effect, I feel that my usual manners don't work on you there. I don't think it's difficult to pull the thumbscrews tighter to get you into your lane of best potential, but you have the same tendency to move from place to place so it's lacking a permanent and direct element. In some way I still do suppose it's a benefit, maybe not with instant results like Supervision but given how we get on well and are often productive + complementary, it works.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chae

No no it's alright, it still has relevance as far as benefit dynamics go. I noticed that you do well being advised what is right for you to do and what isn't, you might even listen to condemnation and scolding without any factual basis, just based on power pressuring. Strictness appeals to you rather than has an upsetting effect, I feel that my usual manners don't work on you there. I don't think it's difficult to pull the thumbscrews tighter to get you into your lane of best potential, but you have the same tendency to move from place to place so it's lacking a permanent and direct element. In some way I still do suppose it's a benefit, maybe not with instant results like Supervision but given how we get on well and are often productive + complementary, it works.

---

Thanks.

I do have trouble with the ethics of actions, and appreciate it when someone gives me their opinions in that area. I have no problems with listening to strict or harsh judgements. I can accept or reject those on their merits without being affected by them.

I have a tendency to like rules, but to primarily think that they only apply to other people, unless I discover that they are useful to me.

As for your feeling that your usual manners don't work on me, I'd say that was the basis of most of the frustration that my SLI ex-wife felt in our marriage. The pressure she tried to apply didn't work on me. The pressure that ESI's apply usually does work on me, unless they are completely off the wall. I feel that being able to positively influence your partner is one of the most important aspects of duality, and it is lacking in most other inter-type relations. My ex and I were a nearly perfect match in every respect other than this, and I'd say that this is what brought our relationship to a close. (She was the one who moved out.)

:poo:

I was very close to a (perceived) EII. I definitely felt an imbalance, and I could tell that he got more from being with me than I got from being with him. He expected me to be more proficient with Fi than I am, and because of that he started to resent me and view me as a cold robotic asshole over time. He was really into fashion and dressing up for his personal sensory enjoyment, whereas the only reason I would care about dressing up would be to affect the perception others have of me based on my clothing. He didn't care about success in competition, and for me failing to succeed in competition is a major insecurity. He frequently wanted to cuddle me, which made me very uncomfortable. He wanted me to be more receptive to his childlike playfulness, and I never was. Over time I began to feel burdened by him, like he was a needy child and I was getting little out of the relationship. It almost felt as though he wanted me to be a father figure to him. What bonded us was shared Fi valuing, though he expected me to value it in a different way. His desire to avoid Se at all costs bothered me. I did trust him and consider him to be a friend, which is rare for me.

I've never been especially close to an LSI, but I'm highly attracted to them and I can tell that they sort of think I suck.

LSEs usually think that I cross :Fi: boundaries far too often. They also expect me to be more proficient in :Si:. My knowledge is usually thought as useless even when they ask for my help and I can solve it. :confused:

Now, I am fully aware that I am not a recognized member, nor a welcome guest, among the applied theoretical socionics intelligentsia of the 16t microsocion. On the contrary, I have officially been exiled from Theory more times than anybody would have cared to count -- and, even, more than a few times, self-exiled. Moreover, I don't think I've ever seriously "contributed" in a thread that's dedicated to socionical discourse before.

These being said, the matter at hand here is rather close to heart, and possibly the sole area in which I might be comfortable in claiming to have some semblance of sufficient experience.

Almost all of the close relationships in my life, save for the superficially strong connection that has existed between me and my close relatives (e.g. mother, father, aunt, a household budgie, my graphics card), of a romanto-sexual nature or otherwise (and I would uphold that asexual relationships can be romantic and sexual relationships can be aromantic, and so on), the gender of my partner nonwithstanding, have been initiated, maintained, and/or peacefully abandoned between myself -- who, I am going to nonchalantly presume to be an ILI -- and a representative of the consistently most charming sociotype that's codified as EII. That would render the said dynamic, of course, a benefit relationship. And as was implicit in the sentence, almost all other close relationships I've had (which number very few in comparison either way) with self-personified standard-bearers of other types -- almost never with extraverts, at that -- have either slowly and subtly faded into obscurity and oblivion, or been subject to terminative conflict in the final stage, and (emotionally) somewhat violently abolished. With EIIs, however, outspoken grudge, perpetuation of temporary surges of strife, and the pestilent, putrid germination of interpersonal disregard, indifference and neglect, have proven to be nigh impossible. I hereby claim these with the confidence of invulnerability against repudiation. I am inclined to believe that, the facts I have spoken regarding the progression of my relationships with EIIs, are sufficient indicators as to the "not remarkably dissatisfied" attitude not only myself, as the benefactor, but also my beneficiaries, have nurtured and sustained throughout, and mutually benefited from. If the EIIs I am, and have been, closely interacting with were to be interviewed, even though they might easily point out a certain number of aspects of my personality that're frustrating to deal with -- some of which, I would attribute to my psychological and mental illnesses that are no secret to anyone, without hesitation --, I am more than assured that their views of me would invariably be significantly more appreciative than indignant or critical, as would mine of them.

Of course, however, there are issues that need to be addressed, if one desires to establish a complete picture of my "downwards" benefit relationships. For one, there are EIIs who I've had the opportunity of observing (in social contexts), but who I have seemed to be mostly uninterested in, and not even tried to commence dialogue. To explain that, I think it would be proper to refer to my cripplingly so-last (and contraflow) instincts hierarchy, and the lamentable fact that, simply, for me, group environments, and the manifestations of people therein, bring out the worst aspects of people's personalities for me -- and, thus, it could be reasoned that the main explanation as to why I haven't especially favored every EII I have seen should be that I haven't had the opportunity of engaging in one-on-one dialogue with most of them, and be enthralled thereby -- as EIIs aren't known to be the most gracefully gregarious and group-concordant folk anyway. Other than that, naturally, one would expect the presence and effect of specialized penchants for "contents of personality" that I have, rather than "structure" (which Theory is all about), that have rendered some EIIs more immediately intriguing than others: The time-old matter of "mutual interests", the progenitor of affectionate sentiments that amount to "Oh! Are we not remarkably similar? Then, we should be together, and interact more, since we don't drive each other out of our comfort zones."

Having mentioned that, I think it would be appropriate to note here that, my true duals are indeed EIIs, rather than SEEs, or any other type --

I know that is total blasphemy where sociotheory reigns, but hark:

Duality, as I see it, is a direct derivative; a projected, externalized, interpersonal equivalent of the intrapersonal Jungian notion of individuation -- the conquest of what you are not, and thus equating "knowing thyself" with omniscience. It is, in socionics, seeking refuge outside oneself, and basking in the solace (or inspiration for growth) that is procured by the complementation of the acquiesced or acquired other.

Within this framework, I would argue that -- although, I am only going to argue for myself, because I don't have any esteem to speak in others' stead in this matter yet -- not only "in terms of content", but also functionally, structurally, the complementations I seek differ from most of my sociotypemates. For one, I tend to think that I contain sufficient amounts of unmanifested and bridled Se within myself already, to be regulated and released in periods of psychological health.

Explaining how all of these developed for me would be a strenuous task both for myself and the audience (whose perseverant presence, if they have read up to this point, I revere), but I am very much inclined to opine that, I am not in search of sensuality in a relationship, primarily -- and by sensuality I am referring to Se and Si. That eliminates half of the socion, and my presumed dual, as I assume a few people recognized and gasped in disapproval already. Also, to whoever proposes that this is false equation, I have nothing to say. Again -- it would be extremely painful to explain (for you), but I know how I've come to see things this way.

Preposterous improprieties abound, but I don't mean to stop here:

I am also convinced that I don't seek the company of extraverts in my close relationships. They're noisy :(.

...and finally, I know, among all functions of "other people", Fi is the one I adore most, as Ti and Te are the most abhorrent (and within myself, Ni ranks first unrivaled). To elucidate this statement, I would have to provide a comprehensive history of the events and interpretations that have constituted my life, and that is one colossal endeavor that cannot be possibly undertaken here. In essence, however, you can again infer that the specific nature of my individuality (that fits within the sociotypological category of ILIhood) has unfolded in such a manner to grant these predilections sovereignity on me.

And, lo, that is the formula of an EII significant other.



In summary, I haven't liked any other type than EII as consistently and intensely and unequivocally (becuase, doubts and interpretations and without-a-doubts are ever-present facets of my life) as I have liked EIIs. The world would be an incomparably worse place without them, especially the few I know personally.









Disclaimer: Of course that is not to say I don't, and can't, like people of other types.

so you've had negative relationships in the past therefore duality is bogus, got it

@Theoria You sound like Bertrand

And Bertrand doesn't

Ive mentioned in the past that Fe views substance in terms of volume so drawing an equivalency there despite all reason makes perfect sense

It's kind of sad to think we should do well with someone because they're our cognitive functions "dual". There's so much more than that, obviously. EIIs are said to be the ones who engage with their duals the least, and I really doubt I've ever met one with whom I've clicked. I've seen some LSEs on some socion videos on youtube lol, and none of them seemed like my kind of guy, except for one, who anyway didn't fit the stereotyped description of an ESTJ...

my dad is a hard working self sacrificing well meaning sincere person and, I think, LSE

I feel like he'd do super well with an EII

but of course duality is neither necessary nor sufficient, alone, to do well. which is really just to say people (and thus relationships) are more than their type

to their credit my parents have made it work and are testament to exactly that

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bertrand

Ive mentioned in the past that Fe views substance in terms of volume so drawing an equivalency there despite all reason makes perfect sense

---

I was mostly referring to the relentlessly convoluted style.

they deleted the video with the SLE I liked =(((where did he go? help me find him pls
Attachment 10991

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wyrd

I was mostly referring to the relentlessly convoluted style.

---

would it have been as voluminous had it not been convoluted?

now you know the difference between my posts and the one in question

edit: actually this is really unfair to @Theoria and I apologize

i imagine I look at this post through the lens of low res Fi and high res Te and try to abstract out the Te, and when I do that I'm left with a cheeky one liner, but that doesn't mean that's all there is to this. there is a ton of Fi content, and in the same way I think of my long posts as necessitating every word and everything having a shade of this or that meaning, i imagine the same rings true here in a Fi sense

so I'm sorry i let my haste in replying to wyrd short shrift your contribution

aw I've found him but now the comments say he's more a LIE : (
I'll never find my dual, now I know
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfUHf6bi768

LIE master race

edit: that guy used to post here right? I loved him very insightful

he actually made me really re think my initial misconceptions of LSE

and I %100 identify with what he's saying here, with no intuition or Fi growing up

wut?! the LIE guy was here? :D honestly he looks more LSE to me... I was with a SLE guy once and he just used to make the same faces.. very S, not I... idk

yeah totes 99% sure thats him, it was before my time as well so we never interacted

he went by LSE here, I actually think hes LIE too, he's just too conceptual by nature. its sustainable not draining for him, you can tell

people say oh its HA, but its not teenage level cries for help and empty posturing, its real insight. so either we're both LSE and I just can't tell that we're both not very deep, or I think we're on a similar level and both intuitive

He doesnt look like SLE at all.

@sluga
thanks god :D

@Bertrand
Pfff this whole thing that as soon as one gets a bit "abstract", he's typed as Intuitive, is definitely damaging. How many people get typed incorrectly because of that? So many... I've been growing up with kids who'd always score as INTPs and INTJs in MBTI, only to find out they were all sensing, with the accurate tests.

It's not like if one uses his brain he's not a Sensor! Sensor have a <3 too!

Sensors solidarity~

(sorry I went off topic completely eheh)

no i totally agree, but this isn't some test where its like "are you an idiot?--check the sensor block if so"

i get this based off the patterns over time that manifest in his willingness to talk about personality at the conceptual level and make youtubes of it (he used to have a channel), and not just videos as pretense to talk about social topics (celebrities) or current events or "sensing topics" but the substantive content of personality theory. in other words, lots of people go to personality forums to talk about: music, art, food, clothing, celebrities, politics, life hacks, fitness, everything but the theory itself except in the most superficial sense or as a launchpad or digression to/from other issues. to me that is more the mark of sensing, and I agree its awesome. without those people these forums wouldnt be nearly as fun and informative in every sense of the word

but its pretty clear who the pragmatists and socials are v the humanitarians and researchers. our conversation right now is a great example of us gravitating away from the concrete social event into an abstract discussion of its meaning and implications, whereas others are clearly anchored in the opposite direction and thus naturally gravitate that way

anyway he still could be LSE, he does talk in terms of personal experience, but I believe that's a Te thing trying to "keep it relevant in practice, or otherwise fact based" v Ti which would be like nuts and bolts of the semantics

Well, I get what you mean with that sort of shallowness you talk about, I agree that it looks like S most of times, but that's not a rule. I really wasn't referring to it when I meant that S types use their brains lol.... You see, S types can actually engage in all sort of topics, but you'll notice how they do it differently from an Intuitive, mostly because of body lang. I've found the best, detailed, spot on descriptions coming from ESI/ SEI, because they have a special eye to notice those details that Intuitive types always leave behind. SLEs/ SLIs I know are between the ones with the biggest collections of weird, uncommon movies I know... and they'd probably engage in the most trivial threads, but just to make fun of all the people in there.. (although you wouldn't recognize it as mockery from a SLI maybe)... you see, it's not the type to say what intelligence you are. Even because, saying so, you'll leave behind all the personal influences. Two EIEs, for instance, might be totally different in what they talk about and are interested in, there's who grew up among savages and there's who has 3 phd, then of course, they'll express and like different things..

this gives me great inspiration for My Next Big Post (collective groan from audience) about how sensors and intuitives talk about the same topic but differently, and how specifically sensors tend to treat conceptual matters and intuitives concrete ones. im going to say its going to revolve around their vital functions and be implicit in where they go with the topic, which would be analysis according to their highest res conscious functions. i.e. sensors will look at the sensory aspects of the matter in the greatest detail, whereas intuitives will interpret even concrete content in terms of its implications and prospects, and each approach will entail vital assumptions arising out of the subdued functions working unconsciously

Ok Bert but I kind of think it's the other way around, Intuitives are about concepts (or ideas) while Sensors are more about the applications and factual side of it... ok to ideas but how are they practical? (S)

There are other reference charts but I am always looking at this one: http://www.socionics.com/rel/relcht.htm

I like the direct links to short descriptions on the same chart.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hybris theory

Ok Bert but I kind of think it's the other way around, Intuitives are about concepts (or ideas) while Sensors are more about the applications and factual side of it... ok to ideas but how are they practical? (S)

---

ya what I'm saying is I want to talk about what it looks like when sensors talk about conceptual stuff and intuitives talk about concrete stuff, and how they each intepret the subject in light of their strengths which naturally contrasts with the subject matter

oh sorry I got it all twisted : ) that's a pretty bad ass idea

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bertrand

ya what I'm saying is I want to talk about what it looks like when sensors talk about conceptual stuff and intuitives talk about concrete stuff, and how they each intepret the subject in light of their strengths which naturally contrasts with the subject matter

---

That would be interesting. My hypothesis is that when a Sensor talks conceptual things to the iNuitive, the iNtuitive thinks, "Finally! He is talking about something normal/interesting!" But then the iNtuitive might have high hopes to take the conversation a lot further than the Sensor really intends to take it... And visa versa, of course. The iNtuitive's "Sensor comments" are a comfort and relief to the Sensor...

yeah there's a lot going on there... at its most basic I think people really want positive feedback according to their mobilizing and they'll take that in almost any form they can get it, but the best would be via [the suggestive] Fi for me. Which is why duals are so awesome, because for me its like when someone says "I love you and believe in you, let me prove it to you with my actions" its literally the best feeling in the world

for SLI it would be more creative expressions of Fi (Ne/Fi), which is precisely what IEE does, etc

IEE wants some kind of Si manifestation of Te, which would be like well thought out practical gifts. my SLI ex got me boots ive gotten compliments on for 3 years running now, and they basically changed my life (never was a boot person before). that Si feet thing again. anyway its literally the gift that keeps on giving. that is some serious Si Te, etc

in that way when it comes to relationships at least, sensors and inituitives are actually open to a surprising degree to comments arising out of different perceptual axes. at the same time, its kind of narrow cause Fe Si is like uuuughh, for example when ESE tries to run up on you and rub your back or something.. which is what cracks me up about all these "physical touch" love language people, its like everyone likes sex, I get it, thats why its sex, but how do you feel about unsolicited acts of physical affection like homosexual backrubs from your boss. can you accept that in the spirit it was given? if so probably some kind of Si Fe valuer. as for me id rather maintain my bubble

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Olimpia

I've never been as attracted to an LII as they were to me. I cannot ever see it happening. I'm also the Ni subtype, so when a guy is Se PoLR, it will be rather unattractive to me on a romantic basis. It is not repulsive, but it is simply a clear lack of romantic interest. LIIs are strictly great "mind partners" for me, in the sense that the mental connection can be quite good, better than with any other type possibly. But only getting mental stimulation is not enough for a romantic relationship for me (in other words, I am not "sapiosexual" enough for that); that's better for friendship.

I know of several IEI-Fe people dating LIIs however, and it seems like several of them do get married. (I find subtype matters quite a lot in Benefit, and probably in Supervision too – it creates a bridge between the types and slightly outweighs the imbalance. The subtype of the Benefactor and Supervisor both seem to matter more.) I know of an IEI-Fe female who's been married to her LII-Ti husband for a rather long time, and she seems happy enough. She once talked about her struggles with the LII some time into the relationship; I'm assuming she had to get over the fact that her husband won't fulfill certain expectations she has, etc.

I find it interesting to note that all longterm Benefit marriages I have known or observed were with a female Benefactor (and usually matching subtypes). It's typically women who've had negative experiences in the past, and/or who feel more comfortable being with a guy who's unlikely going to leave them because of the asymmetric dynamic. Often it is said that the one who cares more has the power, and that is certainly the case with the Benefactor; the Beneficiary cares more, so the Benefactor has more power. I am assuming that when a guy is the Benefactor, he's more likely going to tire of it and his eyes will wander, and that's why there aren't too many long-term Benefit relationships with a male Benefactor.

Anyhow, I do think that Benefit marriages can and do work. It typically requires a female Benefactor, matching subtypes, and being able to accept and overlook the Beneficiary's shortcomings.

When it comes to me being a Beneficiary, I surely have been attracted to a good share of ESIs in the past. It never lead to anywhere (with the guys). I've also had several ESI female friends and acquaintances. The ESIs usually positioned themselves as someone who knows better than I do or who has more/better experience than I do, or who's my protector in a way and takes me under their wing at certain moments. It is not uncommon for some ESIs to find me somewhat silly or not particularly worthy of attention at first. Two ESI 9 friends have just discarded me once I did "something wrong" in their eyes... I do feel the imbalance on some level. I often admire them more than they admire me. Since I have become aware of this dynamic, I've become more critical of ESIs and I don't really crush on them anymore, for the most part. It would be kind of doomed anyway.

---

I find this very interesting. I understand the logic behind Benefit pairs faring better with a woman Benefactor. However, all the Benefit relationships/marriages I know involve a male Benefactor + female Beneficiary.

The first one is an ESI-Se m + IEI-Fe f marriage. IEI is very obviously the recipient in the relationship and takes advantage of ESI’s goodwill towards her. IEI is unhealthy and this skews my ability to describe their dynamic in terms of normal Benefit.

The second one is an LSE-Te m + ILE-Ne f marriage. They’re cute, have been married for decades, and LSE has never lost his dedication to caring for ILE. Supports her in all things Si.

Third is SLE-Ti with an Alpha SF, but she looks ESE-Fe. They haven’t been together super long but SLE has seemed markedly happier ever since she came into his life. Could be honeymoon phase.

The male Benefactors who married their Beneficiaries seem to really love their Beneficiary wives - seemingly almost more so than the other way around. In many marriages of all intertypes, I see the husband progressively lose his enthusiasm for the relationship until he is just going through the motions - whatever the reason may be. But in these pairs, the Benefactor husband never seems to lose his affection and enthusiasm for the wife, even when the relationship gets difficult. Don’t know what the explanation for this is, but I do know Beneficiaries can touch a special place in your heart.

edit: it may be relevant to note that the long lasting male benefactor pairs listed above had complementary erotic attitudes.

Benefactors draws you in with their creative but you gotta see their leads for what they are. LIEs try persuading me the value of their Te through their creative Ni. Basically its like, "Ni cool, Te nah. We'll chat next week, brah."

ESEs Fe is overly accommodating, their Si is a fucking shit show. ESE "homes" are Barbie dream houses, archetypes for their grubby social status.

I'm legit wondering if the OPs question involves close psychological distance or infatuated love.

My Benefactors are fascinating individuals who awaken my sapiosexual side. But romantically, I am more attracted to my Beneficiaries.

I tend to think ILIs see me as a little kid who never grows up. They often like me, but I don't seem to stimulate interest in them in any way.

My Beneficiaries, SEIs, mostly fit my on-paper ideal for a partner. They are sensual, meek, emotionally sensitive, supportive, family-oriented, and gifted in practical matters. They don't enjoy conflict, and they love to learn and expand their minds and horizons.

In practice, however, SEIs get overwhelmed and annoyed by our shared ethics. SEIs enjoy having their attention needed, and EIIs have such stringent Fi confines around their Ne that SEIs can't keep up with its demanding nature, nor do they want to.

I don't think a LII has ever had the hots for me and vice versa. If they did I never knew about it and they kept their crush a secret well lol. We were always just really good friends at most.

I've liked ESIs before and I think they've liked me too, just not quite as much.

Betrand: I know you're not here anymore but if you are, Fe valuers are not more likely to condone sexual abuse or harrassment like that. It's just probably we are less likely to use 'the system' against people for doing so due to the lack of Te valuing- I'd rather take matters in my own hands with that type of thing, doesn't mean I condone or support it.

Also why did you have to pick on homosexuals? I don't think I'd like heterosexual backrubs either. Or any type of backrubs in a work setting lol.

"everybody likes sex" = too Gamma Democratic like. It's not really saying anything. Everybody might enjoy sex, but we all enjoy it in widely different levels. How often/how people enjoy it is obviously widely varied hence part of the drama and controversy sex almost always brings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BandD

I don't think a LII has ever had the hots for me and vice versa. If they did I never knew about it and they kept their crush a secret well lol. We were always just really good friends at most.

I've liked ESIs before and I think they've liked me too, just not quite as much.

Betrand: I know you're not here anymore but if you are, Fe valuers are not more likely to condone sexual abuse or harrassment like that. It's just probably we are less likely to use 'the system' against people for doing so due to the lack of Te valuing- I'd rather take matters in my own hands with that type of thing, doesn't mean I condone or support it.

Also why did you have to pick on homosexuals? I don't think I'd like heterosexual backrubs either. Or any type of backrubs in a work setting lol.

"everybody likes sex" = too Gamma Democratic like. It's not really saying anything. Everybody might enjoy sex, but we all enjoy it in widely different levels. How often/how people enjoy it is obviously widely varied hence part of the drama and controversy sex almost always brings.

---

LIIs guys are like panting puppies for IEI girls. It actually happens that they form longlasting bonds. But once she steps into the 'SP wannabe' mode he's the last guy who can do anything about it. She's gone.

I have had numerous LII's attracted to me. All 5w6 enneagram type, minus one 5w4. I think it more may be having do with neurodiversity though, as I am autistic, and multiple of said, were neurodvierse. It is easier to communicate with neurodiverse people when you are such, as it strains being communicative towards those who have better theory of mind.

There is an LII who was very attracted to me (the 5w4), and he tried teaching me programming and whatnot once over discord voice chat. I would not oppose to dating him.. We get along well and there is an innate appreciation, but there is a little bit of depth lacking. Nevertheless, he and I share many interests. Spiritual pursuit, namely. It is a pulling connection, a force generating, but it is not an intense shock. It is not a sudden snapping together, just a gentle harmony that leads a touching close, but not firmly in place one another.

My father figure is LII, and I get along with him more than anyone I have known.. Also a 5w6. We have no communicative differences, and very little misunderstanding. 5w6 often tries educate themselves upon numerous matters, though, so this can be a factoring. I have had instantaneous chemistry with an SLE, but have had to distance because he was in ill health and kept refusing towards betterment and I gave him more than should have. So this is making LII my most compatible type of relations I have had with others as of this thus far in my life.

I do not take ITR as the end-all of compatibility. I have seen some of my supervisor LIE, get along absolutely fine with, for instance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skosh

LIIs guys are like panting puppies for IEI girls. It actually happens that they form longlasting bonds. But once she steps into the 'SP wannabe' mode he's the last guy who can do anything about it. She's gone.

---

Get out of here. If my LII brother ever falls for an IEI girl I’m going to lose my mind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Karanime

My father figure is LII, and I get along with him more than anyone I have known.. Also a 5w6. We have no communicative differences, and very little misunderstanding. 5w6 often tries educate themselves upon numerous matters, though, so this can be a factoring. I have had instantaneous chemistry with an SLE, but have had to distance because he was in ill health and kept refusing towards betterment and I gave him more than should have. So this is making LII my most compatible type of relations I have had with others as of this thus far in my life.

---

This is really sweet...my ILI-Te mom’s dad was EII-Fi and she told me growing up they had an understanding that didn’t require words.

Upon finding out I know more Benefit marriages of these subtypes, I’ve thought more about the prospect of a Beneficiary partner. I’ve found I prefer a partner with my dual cognitive style, and this drives my Beneficiaries’ appeal to me often above my activators and semi-duals. My interactions with SEI-Si men have been brief. My SEI-Si female friends do not respond well to my Fi; my SEI-Fe friends are much more nonchalant about it. But I am more romantically attracted to SEI-Si. I have no idea if it’s mutual, though. My EII romanticism is more certain of the potential here than what may be the case in reality.

I was sitting in a diner and saw a pretty and animated blonde ESI-Se female sitting with a dark and mostly silent SLI male, which is Benefit. She seemed happy.

Of course, she was only twenty or so. Plenty of time for things to go wrong.

I don't really have personal experience with this, but I suspect that IEIs would think I'm too boring to date, and I'd think SLIs too boring to date. Though SLI girls can be really hot.