So, you don't think I am an LIE?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cuivienen

all the women are fat

---

Google what is normal weight and how people look with it. :) You wisdom should not be the problem to accept this truth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by muisgod

you might be depressed, try going out and having some real fun

---

I agree with your diagnosis for him, professor. But he fights! The shift to anger is the sign of progress. Unfortunally his thinking issues are permanent, but emotional state will become better definetely. I'd say we may expect a half of year, until his mind will mostly return to norma.
If to take into account his current emotional issues, then SEE version gets additonal weight. Generally, Fi types don't bark at people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lavos

No.

---

What's the difference?

Romance styles are pretty dumb in general and a bad way of typing someone.

However something about Cuivienen's way of talking about relationships (and high level of clarity about what he wants) strikes me as more ethical than logical.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by totalize

Romance styles are pretty dumb in general and a bad way of typing someone.

However something about Cuivienen's way of talking about relationships (and high level of clarity about what he wants) strikes me as more ethical than logical.

---

I don't think it's any dumber to say that the way somebody approaches romance aligns with a perception fx than to say it aligns with a judging fx... But ppl think the romance styles have something to do with bdsm or all this unrelated stuff

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lump

I don't think it's any dumber to say that the way somebody approaches romance aligns with a perception fx than to say it aligns with a judging fx

---

why should a person's approach to romancing the opposite sex be confined to irrational rather than rational?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by totalize

why should a person's approach to romancing the opposite sex be confined to irrational rather than rational?

---

I don't think it should, or that it's either/or.
Somebody here wrote up romance styles for the rational functions once. I can't find it though. 1981slater I think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lump

I don't think it should, or that it's either/or.
Somebody here wrote up romance styles for the rational functions once. I can't find it though. 1981slater I think.

---

i think there is just too much that affects romance for there to be "styles" of it that are linked to rational or irrational types. the DarkAngelFireWolf69 ones are just a bit silly and don't really mirror real life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by totalize

i think there is just too much that affects romance for there to be "styles" of it that are linked to rational or irrational types. the DarkAngelFireWolf69 ones are just a bit silly and don't really mirror real life.

---

They're just a fancy way of saying "this is how Ni tends to manifest in this specific context" or whatever. I see them irl, as just a natural outgrowth of the way ppl act in general. Like if Ne types are predisposed to being fascinated by new things then they ofc are inclined to introduce novelty in relationships. But not to be dependent and wear diapers or whatever, it's not the caricature it's made out to be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by totalize

Romance styles are pretty dumb in general and a bad way of typing someone.

---

This behavior is close to natural as people are under affect and try express best like they understand it. Some things may be used as a factor to assume types. To use such info in a dumb way to do incorrect assumptions is also possible like many other info.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sol

This behavior is close to natural as people are under affect and try express best like they understand it.

---

not really sure what this means.

Im not sure the romance styles are close to reality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lump

I don't think it should, or that it's either/or.
Somebody here wrote up romance styles for the rational functions once. I can't find it though. 1981slater I think.

---

I'm curious about that article, let us know if you can find it :)

EDIT: actually, found it: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...7-Random-ideas

Also, http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ional-Elements

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by totalize

Im not sure the romance styles are close to reality.

---

Caregivers/agressors/victims/etc. stuff goes good from the core theory. And it's when people behave with small self-control, so it has strong relations to their nature, including types. So there is a sense in using "styles" for typing, while the problem is correctly use this data.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDfkNanHI24
Hey your Fe is like this... sorry dude...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Myst

What's the difference?

---

I'm not sure I can provide with an accurate "pseudo-aggressor" romance style description. But I know that I can't personally relate much to what he wrote, nor does it match what I've seen of other gamma NT's. Can't be bothered to find it right now, but if I'm not mistaken, the "official" description is not very similar to that either.

Edit: Okay, I found them. http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...otic-Attitudes

Quote:

---

Psuedo-Aggressors/Employees: LIE (ENTj) ILI (INTp)

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.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sol

Google what is normal weight and how people look with it. :) You wisdom should not be the problem to accept this truth.

---

200 pounds going on 250 is not a healthy weight for any woman. You can't press the scales down that hard without quite a few stomach rolls.

Body fat should be between 10 - 20% for men (I'm 16%) and 20 - 30% for women.

Here, this is you:
http://3g1o5q2sqh3w32ohtj4dwggw.wpen...skinny-man.jpg

And this is your wife:
https://st3.depositphotos.com/110697...-plus-size.jpg

No you're not LIE. I sense
Ni check ☑
Fe check ☑

And Ni > Fe

So IEI

Case closed 🔐

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Syrup

Cuiv is not IEE, he doesnt even value Si or Fi. And an IEE would never present himself as Cuiv does. Like ever. Not even in forums. Not to talk about his wardrobe :lol:. IEEs 3 want to look charming and attractive, EIEs want to make an impact.
To me he's Si PoLR (experiencing Si just in his particular way, regardless what everybody else think or prefer and he feels pretty hurt by Si normativity in society), and his expression could perfectly fit in EIE theatricality (Fe) imo (it has nothing to do with his voice irl, lol).

He also seems fitting into aggressor/victim style I could not imagine him in childlike/caregiver style (I don't think he could imagine himself in that style neither).

I think he's EIE Ni 3w4 8w7 and maybe 6w5. Sx/sp or sp/sx.

---

I think so too. EiE - Ni.

Just Ni and Fe.

Have talked with him too before.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crazedrat1776

You are an ESFj, @OP. How do I know? For one, only an ESFj would ever choose that avatar.
Clear and typical ESFj. Next!

---

Nopes.

E S E
S
E

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Myst

Definitely not LSI. He wants a lot of Se, sure, but way more Feeling as well than what LSI can give.




You almost want an SEE really, lol. But I think you are just very strong on the Ni, not actual Se DS.

---

Eie.

Se as third function.

Problem solved guys

Eie - Ni

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bertrand

E S E
S
E

---

Lol. Honestly i knew Cuivienen on other forum too, so mostly i knew him most here. I can see he's EIE- Ni or IEI for real.

Ni - fe vice fukin versa. XD

No Si.

I know an Ni from afar

Si creative is really bizarre and looks like Ni from the point of view of a lot of people

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bertrand

Si creative is really bizarre and looks like Ni from the point of view of a lot of people

---

Nopes. He's really ni.

Actually Ni makes my head ache. There's intuition in his posts. There's also this..

Ni + Fe is like.. Well, he's that INfJ.. Yes he's more probably an iei. Because eie i know are really 100%socially smooth.

So Ni + Fe. XD

Well i cannot say why or the proofs he's an iei, because it's too personal actually xD

But Cuivienen believe me, you're an iei. XD

You don't have Te. Lol. Nor Si.

Besides ese, hates me. XD

Cuivienen for unknown reasons doesn't seem to hate me.

I have this unknown qualities that appeals with iei even in real life and in forum, i seem attracts iei.

yeah, you're right. you make a good case. cuivinnen likes you and its that strong Ni

Yeah it's the Ni.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by idontgiveaf

Yeah it's the Ni.

---

So if I am Ni-lead and you are Se-lead, then according to Socionics you are cognitively wired to find me irresistible. Hmm.

What if I told you that I was naked right now?

We could test the theory out...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bertrand

yeah, you're right. you make a good case. cuivinnen likes you and its that strong Ni

---

I hated @idontgiveaf for a few weeks, but that just made me feel depressed and lethargic, and I do get a kick out of flirting with her. If I hate someone, I just blitz them and then move on, if I can. If I harboured grudges in the way that many people seem to do online, I would be consumed by my own anger.

Just for the record, I don't hate you; that is a privilege you are yet to earn. At the moment, I would say that you are more of an annoyance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by idontgiveaf

Yeah it's the Ni.

---

yeah, the Ni

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cuivienen

So if I am Ni-lead and you are Se-lead, then according to Socionics you are cognitively wired to find me irresistible. Hmm.

What if I told you that I was naked right now?

We could test the theory out...

---

😑

Nice logic.


Ti polr.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by idontgiveaf



Nice logic.


Ti polr.

---

Answer the question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cuivienen

Answer the question.

---

Well i don't find you irresistible lol xD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by idontgiveaf

Well i don't find you irresistible lol xD

---

You shouldn't have to find someone irresistible to fuck them. Such lofty ambitions can only work against you.

Hmm maybe you are the IEI, and you are just ovulating...XD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lavos

I'm not sure I can provide with an accurate "pseudo-aggressor" romance style description. But I know that I can't personally relate much to what he wrote, nor does it match what I've seen of other gamma NT's. Can't be bothered to find it right now, but if I'm not mistaken, the "official" description is not very similar to that either.

Edit: Okay, I found them. http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...otic-Attitudes

---

OK, I see. The idea was that pseudo-aggressors are only acting victims on close distance with the romantic partner but even there it's not straight victim and in everyday life are more like an aggressor.

The pseudo-aggressor description at the link fits Cuivienen's attitudes very well actually, with how he expressed he does find it uncomfortable to be like a straight victim (like the stereotypical beta NF) and with how he keeps talking about challenging the partner, finding a worthy opponent.

"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."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by idontgiveaf

Eie.

Se as third function.

Problem solved guys

Eie - Ni

---

I agree about Se, not about Fe tho'

Again, Fe role can do all these shenanigans and a little dramatic flair in public, but Fe base attunes into people emotionally and creates reactions in a more subtle way than that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Myst

I agree about Se, not about Fe tho'

Again, Fe role can do all these shenanigans and a little dramatic flair in public, but Fe base attunes into people emotionally and creates reactions in a more subtle way than that.

---

His Fe for me gives a lot of fuck. So, he's Fe because he's aware of other's emotions too much

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by idontgiveaf

His Fe for me gives a lot of fuck.

---

What, you two are fucking after all?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Myst

OK, I see. The idea was that pseudo-aggressors are only acting victims on close distance with the romantic partner

---

They are victims/suborderer with anyone who is felt as Se and not an enemy. Then just behave more naturaly, allowing to take Se control about them and situation.

> in everyday life are more like an aggressor

Ni are never like an aggressor. They have no passion or will for this. At best that would be like analogue with role function.

> The pseudo-aggressor description at the link fits Cuivienen's attitudes very well actually, with how he expressed he does find it uncomfortable to be like a straight victim (like the stereotypical beta NF)

Extraverted victims often kick a little to provoke and after get force, then become closer to "classics".

> how he keeps talking about challenging the partner

Depends how he challenges. What function he tests, awaits response, what answer thinks as best.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Myst

OK, I see. The idea was that pseudo-aggressors are only acting victims on close distance with the romantic partner but even there it's not straight victim and in everyday life are more like an aggressor.

The pseudo-aggressor description at the link fits Cuivienen's attitudes very well actually, with how he expressed he does find it uncomfortable to be like a straight victim (like the stereotypical beta NF) and with how he keeps talking about challenging the partner, finding a worthy opponent.

"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."

---

You seem invested in seeing Cuivienen as a LIE for some reason. Comparing what he says to what the pseudo aggresor romance style is supposed to be, it is obvious they do not match, regardless of what you interpret it to be. I'll just quote some of his posts in the hope you can see the distinction.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cuivienen

I do however love the evocative image of a lustful, horny woman (much "like an elk in rutting season" to use the beautifully romantic language offered earlier) hungry and possessed, her clothes torn to shreds and ready to fuck me out of sex crazed desperation through the night until we are both utterly spent, a quivering mess of flesh and sex juices.

---

Does this sound like gamma?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cuivienen

I want a partner who is so lustful and predatory, that they will literally pin me down out of frustration and try to capture my soul. Therefore she will need a lot of strength, both physically and emotionally, and can't be anxious, self-righteous or easily offended.

---

Does this sound like he wants a gamma SF (especially ESI)?

Everything you are singling out to assert that he is pseudo-aggressor, can be better attributed to being an EIE, who have Se HA and are not as victim-y as IEI's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Myst

What, you two are fucking after all?

---

Lol nopes. XD he wish lol

I have been thinking more about this and will add to my previous comments:

I prefer to stay focused on what I am doing right now and hate distractions. One of the easiest ways to annoy me is to bombard me with questions and/or suggestions of what I could possibly do instead (unless I ask you). I am very sure of what I want, so I am not usually interested in a discussion, only action, and hate it when people vacillate, hesitate and bounce around like pinballs. I love to feel in the zone, especially if have sudden insight and discover a new idea/new way to do something I want - like for me this might be hyperfocus when I'm composing, last night I just realized that if I mentally say a word which represents an emotion, let's say "happy", then the music I create is more vivid and structured. I am notoriously impatient, but this is because I get frustrated by any inertia or lack of contrast. Unless I am passionately engaged with something, I will become apathetic and just drink beer while I surf the net. A boredom trap can become hard to get out of, too, as I'm not particularly self-motivated. I get stimulation from the outside world, especially from women, yet at the same time I always have to feel like I have a purpose - that I'm moving forward, experiencing more, achieving more, and that the next day will be better than the one before it.

I often experience conflict with other people over decision-making because I don't have a clear, logical rationale to communicate. I decide to act instinctively, and then I will start to acquire knowledge and evidence. I expect people to intuitively trust my judgement and follow my lead. However, as I've grown older, I have begun to realise that many people want my reassurance that what might go wrong (in their mind) won't. "What if this or that happened?" type catastrophizing makes me feel depressed and unmotivated, but it seems to be a requirement for many people before they will make a commitment. They want to know my plans in-depth, whereas I consider that too inflexible (after all, they might change).

Often, I will actively try to force a change in an area which is important to me, for example: over the last two years, I have tried to start my own social clubs and my own business. None of it worked out, because I didn't realize how to market my ideas effectively, but I have learned a lot about what works for me and what doesn't, my goals are much clearer and new opportunities have arisen since then. I now plan to move overseas and try out life in another country. Maybe a new scene will offer me some love, maybe it won't, but I will never be happy alone so I owe it to myself to try something else.

My worldview in general is pretty pragmatic: it is better for a society to be homogenous than diverse as this means less infighting and thus more personal freedom for everyone, more innovation also and all of that will benefit my prospective career as a musician. I do believe you should trust people on an individual level until proven otherwise, though. Therefore my in-group interests and respect for individual rights will often come into conflict, so the key to success is finding a balance. However, we have gone too far in one direction (e.g. virtue-signalling BS like feminism, and mass immigration), and this is why a correction (Brexit, Trump, AfD etc) is now taking place.