Attachment style vs Duality showdown!

Does having a primarily secure attachment style cover "a multitude of sins" in a relationship, such as not being an ideal intertype relation? Just how significant is a secure attachment style, in your view? More powerful than duality? Or does it vary person to person?

I'm curious to hear any of your experiences with duality/insecurely attached individuals vs. non-duality/securely attached individuals. Or just words of wisdom...

The Story
It's on my mind after having several electrifying dates with an SLE-Ti. I'm 34, and prior to him have had no experience dating my dual. While I knew beyond doubt he was my dual, I also recognized quickly that he was not in a healthy place emotionally and had not done much work around his attachment style (fearful avoidant I'm guessing) or core wounds from family. It's not surprising that an SLE wouldn't have put in as much emotional/intuitive/healing work into themselves as an IEI by now, but I could see that he was rather volatile and unnecessarily combative, which didn't create feelings of safety in me. I knew I had to walk before getting too heavily invested. It was difficult (putting it mildly), because it's rare for me to feel such a strong connection to someone on all levels.

By contrast, I've had dates with non-duals, like a current SEI (who is very sweet) where I instantly feel safe, seen, valued, etc. He doesn't take offense or fly off the handle over small things. He doesn't take things personally.

Basically, he's Secure. And these people are such a breath of fresh air to me. A sigh of relief. It's a feeling I KNOW I want to have in my next relationship.

However, while I feel great peace and stability and self-worth with this SEI, I also don't feel particularly energized or drawn to him the way I do my dual. And I don't mean I need that "living-on-the-edge" adrenaline rush that unhealthy relationships tend to have. I mean what's missing is the Beta value of joining forces around a specific mission, of building a vision together that will propel us both forward. It feels like that would leave me unsatisfied/held back in the long run, though it feels peaceful now.

So it's a bit of a quandary for me. Do I just keep praying I'll one day meet that unicorn, an emotionally healthy, Secure SLE who happens to share my core beliefs? Haha, even typing that made me chuckle.

(As a side note, my longest-lasting friendships have mostly been with people I identify as Secure attachment--and a couple Fearful Avoidants--even if they're in the opposing quadra. Whereas I've had quick fallouts with same-quadra folks where our attachment styles triggered each other).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Emily

Does having a primarily secure attachment style cover "a multitude of sins" in a relationship, such as not being an ideal intertype relation? Just how significant is a secure attachment style, in your view? More powerful than duality? Or does it vary person to person?

I'm curious to hear any of your experiences with duality/insecurely attached individuals vs. non-duality/securely attached individuals. Or just words of wisdom...

The Story
It's on my mind after having several electrifying dates with an SLE-Ti. I'm 34, and prior to him have had no experience dating my dual. While I knew beyond doubt he was my dual, I also recognized quickly that he was not in a healthy place emotionally and had not done much work around his attachment style (fearful avoidant I'm guessing) or core wounds from family. It's not surprising that an SLE wouldn't have put in as much emotional/intuitive/healing work into themselves as an IEI by now, but I could see that he was rather volatile and unnecessarily combative, which didn't create feelings of safety in me. I knew I had to walk before getting too heavily invested. It was difficult (putting it mildly), because it's rare for me to feel such a strong connection to someone on all levels.

By contrast, I've had dates with non-duals, like a current SEI (who is very sweet) where I instantly feel safe, seen, valued, etc. He doesn't take offense or fly off the handle over small things. He doesn't take things personally.

Basically, he's Secure. And these people are such a breath of fresh air to me. A sigh of relief. It's a feeling I KNOW I want to have in my next relationship.

However, while I feel great peace and stability and self-worth with this SEI, I also don't feel particularly energized or drawn to him the way I do my dual. And I don't mean I need that "living-on-the-edge" adrenaline rush that unhealthy relationships tend to have. I mean what's missing is the Beta value of joining forces around a specific mission, of building a vision together that will propel us both forward. It feels like that would leave me unsatisfied/held back in the long run, though it feels peaceful now.

So it's a bit of a quandary for me. Do I just keep praying I'll one day meet that unicorn, an emotionally healthy, Secure SLE who happens to share my core beliefs? Haha, even typing that made me chuckle.

(As a side note, my longest-lasting friendships have mostly been with people I identify as Secure attachment--and a couple Fearful Avoidants--even if they're in the opposing quadra. Whereas I've had quick fallouts with same-quadra folks where our attachment styles triggered each other).

---

@Emily, I think you summed it up pretty well. We exchange information most constructively with duals, and form the most stable emotional bonds with Secures.

I'm a huge fan of duality, as anyone who has read any of my posts knows. I've had a bunch of GF's, and believe me, nothing clicks like duality. So much so that I've rejected some very solid offers from non-duals in order to not waste my time in an endeavor that can only go so far.

I happen to test as a Secure and I was married to an Avoidant, and in the years we were together, I made her more Secure and she made me more Anxious. Maybe that's a compromise you are willing to make, IDK. I no longer am willing to do that. Since attachment styles are formed in very early childhood, you are dealing with a very ingrained structure in that person. They are not going to change easily, no matter how much love and understanding (and basically just good parenting) you give them.

I don't know how old you are, but I suggest that you find a Secure mate as soon as possible. After age 30, 80% of the Secures have been locked up in very stable relationships and are out of the dating pool, leaving only the Anxious and Avoidant to endlessly cycle through bad marriages. I'm over 30 and I'm looking for an intelligent, Secure ESI, and it seems that there are none available. Horribly enough, when I do see a woman who VI's ESI and who looks well-adjusted and I message her online, I get no response, which I attribute to the perceived differences between the areas in which Duals normally operate. Online and on paper, Duals are from different planets. It is only in real life that they see something in each other.

All relationships are compromises. You just have to decide which things you are willing to give up, in order to have anything at all before the opportunities vanish forever.

Best of luck to you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adam Strange

We exchange information most constructively with duals, and form the most stable emotional bonds with Secures.

---

Well said. It feels like too much to hope for both. Yet I'm idealistically hopeful enough to think it could be out there. Dominant Ni can be funny in that way, especially with Te PoLR. I recognize the statistics about getting older that you mentioned as being accurate, but deep down I always feel like "Nah, it will work out. It will be fine. I'll find him." :) I suppose we tend to be optimistic in our primary function.

Quote:

---

I'm a huge fan of duality, as anyone who has read any of my posts knows. I've had a bunch of GF's, and believe me, nothing clicks like duality. So much so that I've rejected some very solid offers from non-duals in order to not waste my time in an endeavor that can only go so far.

---

I don't want to be a fan of duality, but I can't deny it seems to work. I have very little experience with it myself, though, and haven't been in many romantic relationships. But I believe your experience, and have found it to be true in this latest situation. Do you feel like you now regret rejecting those solid non-duals? It sounds like you're still holding out for duality but you also advised grabbing a Secure person when I find them. I know that's kind of a personal question, so you don't have to answer.

Quote:

---

I happen to test as a Secure and I was married to an Avoidant, and in the years we were together, I made her more Secure and she made me more Anxious. Maybe that's a compromise you are willing to make, IDK. I no longer am willing to do that. Since attachment styles are formed in very early childhood, you are dealing with a very ingrained structure in that person. They are not going to change easily, no matter how much love and understanding (and basically just good parenting) you give them.

---

I agree with you, it's too difficult. Draining. Takes precious energy away from building something valuable and just enjoying life. I would add that--while extremely difficult--attachment style can definitely heal if you're very motivated, but it seems to me like not many people are naturally self-motivated enough (or even aware) to put in the time and effort. NFs are naturally more bent in this direction, and I myself have put in a LOT of work here. I'm mostly Secure, especially in friendships/platonic relationships, but have had to work on both Anxious and Avoidant tendencies in situations that reminded me of emotional turmoil and trauma from my teen years.

Quote:

---

I don't know how old you are, but I suggest that you find a Secure mate as soon as possible. After age 30, 80% of the Secures have been locked up in very stable relationships and are out of the dating pool, leaving only the Anxious and Avoidant to endlessly cycle through bad marriages. I'm over 30 and I'm looking for an intelligent, Secure ESI, and it seems that there are none available. Horribly enough, when I do see a woman who VI's ESI and who looks well-adjusted and I message her online, I get no response, which I attribute to the perceived differences between the areas in which Duals normally operate. Online and on paper, Duals are from different planets. It is only in real life that they see something in each other.

---

There are less options now to be sure, and as a 34-year-old woman I feel pressure in terms of being able to have children (fortunately it's not the main dream of my life, although it's one of them). And I feel your pain--online, my (suspected) duals don't seem like a great match for my values or interested in much beyond a hook-up. The SLE-Ti I met was different, but that also probably has something to do with age.

On a hopeful note, even though I didn't end up in a relationship with this SLE, I was encouraged to even meet one. I don't think we would have been interested in one another in our younger years since the lifestyles we led were so vastly different. I think of duality like a triangle: we both started out at the bottom in different corners, but as we age it's like we started moving towards the same point at the top. I'm actually hopeful I'll start meeting more viable SLEs now. And, (fortunately and unfortunately) divorce opens up a new pool of people, too.

Quote:

---

All relationships are compromises. You just have to decide which things you are willing to give up, in order to have anything at all before the opportunities vanish forever.

---

Agreed. And it's important to evaluate and weigh each person on a case-by-case basis even if they weren't your original ideal.

I do think, though, that dating has only further solidified my unwillingness to give up on either emotional health OR needing Se/Te to build the kind of life I want. I've only gotten clearer on my vision for my life, and can't deny that Se and Te are what's missing. NFs are pretty stubborn about abandoning an ideal, it feels like self-betrayal. The areas I HAVE stopped caring about are things like needing to have the same hobbies or interests, or outdated beliefs/values of my past. I've definitely loosened up in that regard.

Quote:

---

Best of luck to you.

---

Oh man, thanks! And to you.

Emily, my son is a Secure SLE-Ti. I think he is an 8w9 but not totally sure as Enneagram is not my strength (or real interest). I would sure like him to meet a thoughtful, intelligent insightful IEI-Fe as you seem to be. I really want his life to be gifted with the complimentary gifts of his dual, and to have that comfortable acceptance a dual gives, as well as that continued interest and enjoyment of each other. But he is in his early 20s, generally a very different place at your ages...

@Emily, I do not regret passing up on these non-dual offers. One was from a warm, intelligent IEI-Fe (she just texted me best wishes for the Holidays) and the other was from a warm, intelligent LSI who was (usually) fun to be with and was the best sexual match I’ve ever had. But the IEI is my Supervisee and while she generally looks up to me, as I did with my SLI Supervisor ex-wife, there is some mismatch. The same with the Mirage LSI. Mirage for me is a Dual in bed and in one-on-one interactions, and an Extinguishment in public and in life-planning. Neither Supervision nor Mirage are good long-term bets.

From your writing, I can tell that you are highly intelligent and exceedingly self-aware. There aren’t that many people of any type who can match you at that level, but some do exist. (I know an SLE with an MBA and a PhD, but he’s unfortunately gay.)
For the record, my ex-wife was seven years older than I was, and it was never once an issue. They say you can go up to eight years difference if everything else clicks*. For me, she was attractive, intelligent, and a good mother, so she had my essentials. (What didn’t click with us was Supervision, but she never tried to tell this e8 what to do and I respected her opinions and gave her space, so we lasted for a fairly long time. In retrospect, I should have played EII-Fi to her SLI-Te, but that’s really hard, and I didn’t know Socionics when we were having problems.)

You are already ahead of the game by knowing what the rules are and where the edge of the field is and what the best strategy is. You should have no problem eventually finding a Secure SLE. Just remember that age really does not matter if most everything else aligns.


*The eight-year age difference comes from the idea that anything greater than that causes a drift in the cultural markers. You both were impressed by different social influences, like remembering Pearl Harbor or the destruction of the World Trade center. You remember different songs and different social trends.
However, I believe that this is a fundamental error in understanding what makes a compatible marriage.
An LIE, unhappily married to an LII (Extinguishment), warned me that in marriage, you will eventually run out of stories to tell each other. Stories, presumably, which the other can relate to.
But, like his marriage, I think his view is very flawed. Maybe in a seriously unmatched relationship, you have to tell each other stories.
But Duals interact by effectively supporting each other in daily tasks. No stories are needed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Emily

Does having a primarily secure attachment style cover "a multitude of sins" in a relationship, such as not being an ideal intertype relation? Just how significant is a secure attachment style, in your view? More powerful than duality? Or does it vary person to person?

I'm curious to hear any of your experiences with duality/insecurely attached individuals vs. non-duality/securely attached individuals. Or just words of wisdom...

The Story
It's on my mind after having several electrifying dates with an SLE-Ti. I'm 34, and prior to him have had no experience dating my dual. While I knew beyond doubt he was my dual, I also recognized quickly that he was not in a healthy place emotionally and had not done much work around his attachment style (fearful avoidant I'm guessing) or core wounds from family. It's not surprising that an SLE wouldn't have put in as much emotional/intuitive/healing work into themselves as an IEI by now, but I could see that he was rather volatile and unnecessarily combative, which didn't create feelings of safety in me. I knew I had to walk before getting too heavily invested. It was difficult (putting it mildly), because it's rare for me to feel such a strong connection to someone on all levels.

By contrast, I've had dates with non-duals, like a current SEI (who is very sweet) where I instantly feel safe, seen, valued, etc. He doesn't take offense or fly off the handle over small things. He doesn't take things personally.

Basically, he's Secure. And these people are such a breath of fresh air to me. A sigh of relief. It's a feeling I KNOW I want to have in my next relationship.

However, while I feel great peace and stability and self-worth with this SEI, I also don't feel particularly energized or drawn to him the way I do my dual. And I don't mean I need that "living-on-the-edge" adrenaline rush that unhealthy relationships tend to have. I mean what's missing is the Beta value of joining forces around a specific mission, of building a vision together that will propel us both forward. It feels like that would leave me unsatisfied/held back in the long run, though it feels peaceful now.

So it's a bit of a quandary for me. Do I just keep praying I'll one day meet that unicorn, an emotionally healthy, Secure SLE who happens to share my core beliefs? Haha, even typing that made me chuckle.

(As a side note, my longest-lasting friendships have mostly been with people I identify as Secure attachment--and a couple Fearful Avoidants--even if they're in the opposing quadra. Whereas I've had quick fallouts with same-quadra folks where our attachment styles triggered each other).

---

Thank you very much for this thread, it helped me a great deal to understand what does go wrong with me and my relationships, especially with the ESI-Se i tried to date.
If you are like me anxious i would, after having my duality experience with an avoidant Esi, never ever reccomend this couple, it is painful, unsatisfying humiliating and really does not help you grow.
If he was able to work on it, then maybe, but if you both have aggravating problems in the same area i would not further pursue it but look for a better suited dual.

For anyone interested in Attachment theory and how the three main types interact, I recommend buying the following books:

Bad Boyfriends - Using Attachment Theory to Avoid Mr. (or Ms.) Wrong and Make You a Better Partner, by Jeb Kinnison. A very good overview.

Avoidant - How to Love (or Leave) a Dismissive Partner, by Jeb Kinnison. Also very good.

Insecure in Love - How Anxious Attachment Can Make You Feel Jealous, Needy, and Worried and What You Can Do About It, by Leslie Becker-Phelps, PhD.

When I was trying to repair my marriage, I bought about thirty books on the subject of long-term relationships and how to maintain them. The above books were the best ones on Attachment theory. They actually convinced me that, while I could find a way to compromise myself and live with my Avoidant wife, I didn't want to, because of what it would do to me.

I also bought The Seven Principles for Making Marriage Work, by John M. Gottman, PhD. In this book, Gottman stresses the importance of answering bids for attention from your partner, and I extrapolated the idea that successful bidders and repliers would most likely be Duals.

Which has brought me to where I am now: Looking for an intelligent, attractive, Secure Dual of any age, who would also be a good mother. (Because mine was not. Lol. And kindness and understanding play a big, big part in LTR's.)

Trying to put myself in a new place every day, because she's out there and my sitting around the house or working long hours isn't going to find her.

I have a basic question about attachment styles. I get the impression that Secure relationships are “the best”. For non-secure people (from reading the Wikipedia descriptions online, I seem to best fit “fearful-avoidant”), does this theory recommend anything besides “become secure” (not that that’s necessarily bad advice)?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FreelancePoliceman

I have a basic question about attachment styles. I get the impression that Secure relationships are “the best”. For non-secure people (from reading the Wikipedia descriptions online, I seem to best fit “fearful-avoidant”), does this theory recommend anything besides “become secure” (not that that’s necessarily bad advice)?

---

That's the impression that I've gotten, but my relationships haven't really panned out that way. I test as "Avoidant" leaning on Secure and I've had a history of dating semi-"Preoccupied" guys. And even though the attachment theory paints our whole relationships as "doomed to fail" due to how we're "unhealthy" we are bc we aren't Secure, there hasn't been anything to indicate that either of us has to turn into Secures. If anything, there relationships resembles IxTx pairing with an ExFx, and with respect to avoidants it does correspond to DarkAngelFireWolf69's writings about introverted logical types. Thus there really isn't any one style that is "dabess". Actual Secures are a little boring from what I've seen of them in dating, so I don't really see the need for anyone to recreate themselves to fit into this style.

I also don't get where the différence or line is between Instincts, Functions and attachment styles.

Quote:

---

Only gradually do LIEs come to recognize what feelings others have for them, and there is always an element of doubt unless others express those feelings verbally and unambiguously and act in a way that clearly matches their stated feelings, over a sufficient period of time. LIEs are easily made insecure about the status of personal relationships and need frequent reassurance that the other person's feelings have not changed.

---

1dFi can sound like anxious attachment style, while Sx last sounds like avoiding and sx first like anxious again.
Maybe the difference is the emotional component. While 1dFi is insecure about the nature of the bonds it should not be afraid about them, or something like this

Also stratis duality description from Lie-Esi sounds at some point very much like anxious-avoiding relationships. First in courtship ESI being avoidant while LIE tries to close the distance while with grade of closeness this changes and becomes mixed up.
There is a lot of this stuff mixed inside of the description which could to some degree explain how horrible lie-esi duality is described by Strati.

Also Vicitm-Agressor dynamic has a lot of this, but there i can differenciate; while the on and off stuff between my healthy ESI and SLE felt completely natural and was a lot of fun with the avoidant ESI it was hurtful and frustrating.

One thing I learned from participating in a long term Big 5 + attachment style paid study, that tracked me over several years, is that my Big 5 was relatively stable in certain areas but my agreeableness, neuroticism, and attachment style, depended on the person I was with more than something stable inside me which puts me in the 20-30%-ish group that doesn't maintain a stable attachment style over time. Mine is based on dynamics. I can swing between secure and anxious/preoccupied. I think there might be something to sx lasts being more avoidant than sx firsts. Sp firsts can be highly avoidant too though. :thinking:

Quote:

---

Investigators study the stability of working models by looking at the stability of attachment styles. Attachment styles reflect the thoughts and expectations that constitute working models. Changes in attachment styles therefore indicate changes in working models.

Around 70–80% of people experience no significant changes in attachment styles over time.[20][32][33][34][35] The fact that attachment styles do not change for a majority of people indicates working models are relatively stable. Yet, around 20–30% of people do experience changes in attachment styles. These changes can occur over periods of weeks or months. The number of people who experience changes in attachment styles, and the short periods over which the changes occur, suggest working models are not rigid personality traits.

Why attachment styles change is not well understood. Waters, Weinfield and Hamilton propose that negative life experiences often cause changes in attachment styles.[36] Their proposal is supported by evidence that people who experience negative life events also tend to experience changes in attachment styles.[32][37][38] Davila, Karney and Bradbury have identified four sets of factors that might cause changes in attachment styles: (a) situational events and circumstances, (b) changes in relational schemas, (c) personality variables, and (d) combinations of personality variables and situational events.[39] They conducted a study to see which set of factors best explained changes in attachment styles. The study found that all four sets of factors cause changes in attachment styles. Changes in attachment styles are complex and depend on multiple factors.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attachment_in_adults

---

For anyone interested this dissertation on enneagram and attachment style correlations is pretty interesting.


https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/bitstr...=1&isAllowed=y

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aylen

One thing I learned from participating in a long term Big 5 + attachment style paid study, that tracked me over several years, is that my Big 5 was relatively stable in certain areas but my agreeableness, neuroticism, and attachment style, depended on the person I was with more than something stable inside me which puts me in the 20-30%-ish group that doesn't maintain a stable attachment style over time. Mine is based on dynamics. I can swing between secure and anxious/preoccupied. I think there might be something to sx lasts being more avoidant than sx firsts. Sp firsts can be highly avoidant too though. :thinking:



For anyone interested this dissertation on enneagram and attachment style correlations is pretty interesting.


https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/bitstr...=1&isAllowed=y

---

Probably depends more on enneagram and intro/extraversion

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason

Emily, my son is a Secure SLE-Ti. I think he is an 8w9 but not totally sure as Enneagram is not my strength (or real interest). I would sure like him to meet a thoughtful, intelligent insightful IEI-Fe as you seem to be. I really want his life to be gifted with the complimentary gifts of his dual, and to have that comfortable acceptance a dual gives, as well as that continued interest and enjoyment of each other. But he is in his early 20s, generally a very different place at your ages...

---

@Eliza Thomason, this post is sweet :) And I won't deny I'm open to being set up, haha! But yes, that's a bit too big of an age gap for me I think. I like how you described duality above as "comfortable acceptance" and "continued interest and enjoyment of each other."

@Adam Strange, the asymmetrical relationships can definitely be tricky. I've been musing if Mirage is better for irrational types (over Semi-Dual, say), but a slightly worse pairing for rationals. I can't remember where I first heard that idea--it's not original to me, but it made sense as to why I get on with ILEs quite well. Can't speak for romance yet.

Also, I felt uplifted by your post, so thanks. Yes, I am waiting for that inner certainty that "this person feels like an equal," which interestingly I felt with this SLE (less so after a while). Darn it, why can't your SLE person be straight?! I live in the midwest, too, it would have been perfect. Step 1: join a socionics forum. Step 2: get set up by a stranger on the internet to meet the love of my life. All in a couple months. All neatly done and tied up :)

I've set my age range far-ish when it comes to dating, as I agree that if it's the right person you won't feel age unless there are big differences in maturity level. Although sometimes people can be mature in different areas than another person and it will work--again, does it feel like you complement each other's weaknesses or are brought down by them?

Oh yes, I can't picture an 8 being told what to do! I think my older sister's an 8, and I can't recall ever seeing her back down. Hmm, my "problem" is a bit of the reverse of what you describe with your ex; I tend to sense what the other person needs and wants naturally, and then find myself doing that. It's an amazing asset when it comes to understanding others and being able to be in relationship with all kinds of people from all walks of life (it's been great for friendships), but it makes my own preferences foggier. I think my fear has been that I will easily be able to make someone else happy (i.e. play the role they need) due to my ability to adapt and relate, and later come to find I've made myself unhappy.

In regards to the stories: yeah, that doesn't sound like my ideal life. At all. It sounds like pressure to perform or entertain. Sure I want deep conversations, but don't underestimate companionable silence!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FreelancePoliceman

I have a basic question about attachment styles. I get the impression that Secure relationships are “the best”. For non-secure people (from reading the Wikipedia descriptions online, I seem to best fit “fearful-avoidant”), does this theory recommend anything besides “become secure” (not that that’s necessarily bad advice)?

---

@FreelancePoliceman, yes, I think developing a Secure attachment is what's most recommended, in large part because the road there produces inner healing. However, everyone's a work in progress and you don't have to be perfect to enter a relationship. Healing attachment wounds can take a long time, and it's good to have strategies to know "how to work with where you're at right now."

As a side note, being Secure doesn't mean you won't have other problems. Lots of Secures get divorced, or are alcoholics, or have major character flaws, etc. The upside of being Secure is that you have more trust in yourself and other people. Communication and conflict skills tend to be better because they're operating out of a baseline that they're safe, loved, and listened to. Relationships feel sturdier to them and less likely to fall apart at the slightest breeze.


Included a link to some informative videos I found on YouTube VERY recently. I feel like she's a strong believer in change, but is realistic and gives strategies for your current state, like "here's what to do if you're a fearful avoidant dating someone anxious." The Fearful Avoidant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJJJpvJ2TAc

(She kinda strikes me as an EIE doing what EIEs do best....)

Hi, Emily. Your intelligence really comes through with every post. You remind me of an IEI-Fe whom I have dated a few times (I'm LIE-Te with enhanced Se, so I can do a fair imitation of an SLE for a short time.) She's an amazing person, but has struggled with having had a mother who steered her away from a career in the theater to a PhD in Astronomy (!!).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Emily

@Adam Strange, the asymmetrical relationships can definitely be tricky. I've been musing if Mirage is better for irrational types (over Semi-Dual, say), but a slightly worse pairing for rationals. I can't remember where I first heard that idea--it's not original to me, but it made sense as to why I get on with ILEs quite well. Can't speak for romance yet.

---

Be very, very cautious if you decide to have a fling with an ILE. The woman I mentioned above was married to an ILE for many years, before finally leaving him and taking nothing but her two kids. She's incredibly angry at how her marriage turned out, but she and I were recently working on a project with a third party ILE and she told me that she found him attractive, even while knowing that he was the same type as her ex-husband. Step away from the car, ma'am.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Emily

Also, I felt uplifted by your post, so thanks. Yes, I am waiting for that inner certainty that "this person feels like an equal," which interestingly I felt with this SLE (less so after a while). Darn it, why can't your SLE person be straight?! I live in the midwest, too, it would have been perfect. Step 1: join a socionics forum. Step 2: get set up by a stranger on the internet to meet the love of my life. All in a couple months. All neatly done and tied up :)

---

Lol, this is exactly what I want, too. Just have some agency send me a note saying that they have found the best dual for me, and she will be arriving on the first flight tomorrow morning. I'd be all for that.

Incidentally, the IEI-Fe is in her early fifties (I think?) and she said she's been trying to date for the past ten years, and in her experience, the guys she is meeting are either gay, geezers, or they want her to support them. She said that when she does get a date with a nice guy, they never ask her for a second date, which I find to be crazy. She's a catch. She did date a possible SLE for a while, but he asked her for money and he cheated on her. She is encountering the same things that I am encountering: After age 30, the good ones are gone. Until their SO's start having heart attacks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Emily

I've set my age range far-ish when it comes to dating, as I agree that if it's the right person you won't feel age unless there are big differences in maturity level. Although sometimes people can be mature in different areas than another person and it will work--again, does it feel like you complement each other's weaknesses or are brought down by them?

Oh yes, I can't picture an 8 being told what to do! I think my older sister's an 8, and I can't recall ever seeing her back down. Hmm, my "problem" is a bit of the reverse of what you describe with your ex; I tend to sense what the other person needs and wants naturally, and then find myself doing that. It's an amazing asset when it comes to understanding others and being able to be in relationship with all kinds of people from all walks of life (it's been great for friendships), but it makes my own preferences foggier. I think my fear has been that I will easily be able to make someone else happy (i.e. play the role they need) due to my ability to adapt and relate, and later come to find I've made myself unhappy.

In regards to the stories: yeah, that doesn't sound like my ideal life. At all. It sounds like pressure to perform or entertain. Sure I want deep conversations, but don't underestimate companionable silence!

---

I think IEI-Fe's are natural performers and they conform and adapt to their audiences. Really, if I didn't know about Supervision and Victim-Victim sex, I'd be tempted to do more than just hang out with her as a supporter. The IEI-Fe can definitely get lost in her service to others. But I think that you are smart enough to know that when the oxygen masks descend, put on your own mask first.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Emily

@FreelancePoliceman, yes, I think developing a Secure attachment is what's most recommended, in large part because the road there produces inner healing. However, everyone's a work in progress and you don't have to be perfect to enter a relationship. Healing attachment wounds can take a long time, and it's good to have strategies to know "how to work with where you're at right now."

As a side note, being Secure doesn't mean you won't have other problems. Lots of Secures get divorced, or are alcoholics, or have major character flaws, etc. The upside of being Secure is that you have more trust in yourself and other people. Communication and conflict skills tend to be better because they're operating out of a baseline that they're safe, loved, and listened to. Relationships feel sturdier to them and less likely to fall apart at the slightest breeze.


Included a link to some informative videos I found on YouTube VERY recently. I feel like she's a strong believer in change, but is realistic and gives strategies for your current state, like "here's what to do if you're a fearful avoidant dating someone anxious." The Fearful Avoidant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJJJpvJ2TAc

(She kinda strikes me as an EIE doing what EIEs do best....)

---

Emily, the bolded part above is a link to a great resource. I'm watching her videos on Dismissive-Avoidants (my ex-wife) and I'm kind of crying, because they are so true. The Dismissive-Avoidants want the security of a relationship without the intimacy.

Here is what one writer said about DA's, and it was EXACTLY my own experience with my ex-wife:

Spent 3 years with a DA. I’ll post what I saw: 1) she rarely initiated. Maybe 2/100 times. She also never flirted or knew what foreplay was. 2) she had difficult time saying what she wanted or how she was feeling. I had to question her in order to get a sense that she was participating in the endeavor. 3) sex most definitely declined the closer we became as a couple and the more vulnerable she was. Towards the last year of the relationship, she never initiated. 4) the first 6 months of the relationship was the best sex. Not because of frequency, but because of her passion and involvement. I found it odd that the more I knew what she liked and did the things that got her off easily, the less interested she seemed in sex!

DA's need love too, but they push people away.

You know, I tried for years to get my ex to come back after she left. She just stood off at a distance and waved and said No, but she didn't ask for a divorce and there was never any other guy. It broke my heart and kept breaking my heart, until I just called a stop to it and divorced her.

She seemed happier for a couple years after the divorce, but now, after four years, she calls me sometimes to ask me what I'm doing, or to invite me over for a short dinner, or she sends me a little present. I don't know why she can't see that I'm not getting on that bandwagon again. I know she's lonely, and I know that her DA condition isn't her fault, but I gave up trying to fix it a long time ago.

In the last few years of our marriage, when things were going very wrong and I was trying to figure out what the problem was and wasn't getting it at all, the image that comes to mind is one of our marriage as a car, where she took a hammer to the windshield and smashed every single part of it, but it didn't actually break apart. It still had the same outside shape, it was still part of the car; it just wasn't a windshield anymore.
This, of course, is a cautionary tale for anyone considering a relationship with a Dismissive-Avoidant.
Note that I also think it's important to get with a Dual, too. :)

I think this is pointless to think about. You have to meet someone who is compatible. It happens or it doesn’t.

I do think however that all ITR are better than duality for gently digging out your skeletons from your closet and helping you learn emotionally. Two perfectly-fitting pieces of a powerful machine won’t work very well with cobwebs in between.

I'm Avoidant, but I watched a video that said one thing Secure's do that the other styles don't do is they know they will be ok if the relationship ends, I tried "behaving" that way or adopting that mindset for like a week, and surprisingly it actually worked, I think it can make you a little stronger and bolder in your relationships with people, risking to be more honest, and doing things that you know are beneficial but you fear can be rejected. I think it helps.

@Lord Pixel, that's awesome it worked for you when you tried it. I recall hearing advice along those lines, to ask yourself when triggered "what would a Secure person do?" I noticed Securely attached people have an abundance rather than scarcity mentality around relationships (not that they're invulnerable to hurt, of course). Like, "if this person doesn't work out I believe there will be more people and that I'm worthy of finding love and I will find it." They also demonstrate more trust in communication, like they actually believe bringing up issues and feelings will result in a closer and better relationship!

So an Avoidant--where loneliness can feel like such a sanctuary--could begin to tell themselves, "I know opening up is a risk, but love and closeness are worth the courage it takes to either open up or reach out. The risk is better than cutting myself off from any love at all." And take small, small steps in that direction with safe, patient people.

@sbbds Why pointless?

I like that analogy about a machine with cobwebs. And I do think a dual more than just about anyone would understand your point of view and give you the benefit of the doubt when dealing with your stuff. Maybe to a fault. I've thought about the "dangers of duality," i.e. duals getting into a relationship that is toxic in other ways, and then staying much longer than they should because of the duality bond where they're getting other psychological needs met.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Emily

@sbbds Why pointless?

I like that analogy about a machine with cobwebs. And I do think a dual more than just about anyone would understand your point of view and give you the benefit of the doubt when dealing with your stuff. Maybe to a fault. I've thought about the "dangers of duality," i.e. duals getting into a relationship that is toxic in other ways, and then staying much longer than they should because of the duality bond where they're getting other psychological needs met.

---

Why is there a point to all of this? No amount of deliberating is going to change the fact that you’ll either find someone compatible to join your life, or you won’t.

I think it’s the opposite actually. A dual might be empathetic towards you if they already like you and you two have developed some common ground or can see value in one another already. But otherwise, why would someone who has the opposite strengths and therefore the opposite problems in life, naturally and easily be able to empathize with you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sbbds

Why is there a point to all of this? No amount of deliberating is going to change the fact that you’ll either find someone compatible to join your life, or you won’t.

---

I can't argue with that.

Quote:

---

I think it’s the opposite actually. A dual might be empathetic towards you if they already like you and you two have developed some common ground or can see value in one another already. But otherwise, why would someone who has the opposite strengths and therefore the opposite problems in life, naturally and easily be able to empathize with you?

---

It's a good point/question, one I ponder myself. Until I met this recent SLE I felt like, "how in the heck would this work? There's no way." I'm also not convinced it's an ideal match for every person of every type, or for every season of their life.

And to your point, yes, I don't think duals naturally empathize with each other. Especially if you didn't grow up around them (which I didn't). I'm also at more of a loss communicating with them online than in person because Se is more about physical and visual interaction. If you crave understanding there are a lot of other relationships that would be better. I love my NF friends for this reason.

But with duals I wonder if it's more about a sympathy springing up between them, or a desire to help the other in what they lack. With age, too, it seems like you become more interested in the area of your dual. In Beta quadra we seem to want to build something for the future or be involved in some sort of social mission, and maybe you can get farther in this with your dual. To me it seems like a relationship that takes time and patience, but the rewards are worth it.

Do you have any experience with your dual in real life?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Emily

I can't argue with that.



It's a good point/question, one I ponder myself. Until I met this recent SLE I felt like, "how in the heck would this work? There's no way." I'm also not convinced it's an ideal match for every person of every type, or for every season of their life.

And to your point, yes, I don't think duals naturally empathize with each other. Especially if you didn't grow up around them (which I didn't). I'm also at more of a loss communicating with them online than in person because Se is more about physical and visual interaction. If you crave understanding there are a lot of other relationships that would be better. I love my NF friends for this reason.

But with duals I wonder if it's more about a sympathy springing up between them, or a desire to help the other in what they lack. With age, too, it seems like you become more interested in the area of your dual. In Beta quadra we seem to want to build something for the future or be involved in some sort of social mission, and maybe you can get farther in this with your dual. To me it seems like a relationship that takes time and patience, but the rewards are worth it.

Do you have any experience with your dual in real life?

---

I completely agree with you. As for the bolded, I only really ever speak from my experiences lol. I tend to like IEIs and I’m obviously compatible with them in practical ways.

I think you possibly misunderstood what I said in my previous post though.. where I think it’s all types EXCEPT for your dual that can help you more easily in evicting closet skeletons. It speaks to what you said about different kinds of people being ideal for different seasons in one’s life. In my analogy, my point was that two well-oiled, cleaned pieces can work together in a machine. But they’re meant to work together in this cleaned state, only. They’re not meant to clean each other or oil one another up (except for maybe Alphas who are into that). I don’t think that truly “perfect” duals can have that additional “cleaning” function. That’s better suited for other “pieces of the puzzle”, or less-well-matched duals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sbbds

Why is there a point to all of this? No amount of deliberating is going to change the fact that you’ll either find someone compatible to join your life, or you won’t.

I think it’s the opposite actually. A dual might be empathetic towards you if they already like you and you two have developed some common ground or can see value in one another already. But otherwise, why would someone who has the opposite strengths and therefore the opposite problems in life, naturally and easily be able to empathize with you?

---

If you are great at something, and you see a beginner trying to do it, most people react to the person as if they are a helpless child, and also they feel it's no risk to themselves to help since it's something that is easy for them. When you see a child trying to walk do you go "I can't understand them, walking is so easy, what's wrong with them." No you most likely go "Aw" and try and help. Dual empathy is like that. It's easy and natural because your problem is so obviously clear to them, unlike other types, where they maybe can sense what is wrong but not be able to help in a way you understand or can't even put their finger on the problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lord Pixel

If you are great at something, and you see a beginner trying to do it, most people react to the person as if they are a helpless child, and also they feel it's no risk to themselves to help since it's something that is easy for them. When you see a child trying to walk do you go "I can't understand them, walking is so easy, what's wrong with them." No you most likely go "Aw" and try and help.

---

I agree with you when it comes to helping them. I was talking about just empathizing though, in response about duals “understanding your point of view easily”.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Emily

@Lord Pixel, that's awesome it worked for you when you tried it. I recall hearing advice along those lines, to ask yourself when triggered "what would a Secure person do?" I noticed Securely attached people have an abundance rather than scarcity mentality around relationships (not that they're invulnerable to hurt, of course). Like, "if this person doesn't work out I believe there will be more people and that I'm worthy of finding love and I will find it." They also demonstrate more trust in communication, like they actually believe bringing up issues and feelings will result in a closer and better relationship!

So an Avoidant--where loneliness can feel like such a sanctuary--could begin to tell themselves, "I know opening up is a risk, but love and closeness are worth the courage it takes to either open up or reach out. The risk is better than cutting myself off from any love at all." And take small, small steps in that direction with safe, patient people.

---

Yea, thinking about the extent of pain and whether it is something I can handle or not actually puts the relationship in perspective for me, it lets me know that what I fear "loss" is not fatal. That is why it helps me be more secure, because I can risk losing the person now, hence being more real and honest. And knowing you can survive the loss of the relationship comes with the pleasure of feeling yourself get stronger as a result.

That avoidant advice, I've heard it before but it hasn't clicked yet like the secure advice, idk why, thinking of what I can gain from the risk I guess to me isn't as important as knowing I can survive the risk, I guess my perspective is more protection > possibility. maybe because pain is more of a motivator than pleasure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sbbds

I agree with you when it comes to helping them. I was talking about just empathizing though, in response about duals “understanding your point of view easily”.

---

Ok well definitely not understanding your point of view easily I don't think, but they can see you in a rough situation in their area of expertise, which most of your problems will be in anyway and it can move them to help more than any other type. So empathy/sympathy whatever you call it, it's easy for them to see your problem and want to lend a hand. probably a reflex for them to lend a hand actually.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sbbds

As for the bolded, I only really ever speak from my experiences lol.

---

Touché :)

Quote:

---

I think you possibly misunderstood what I said in my previous post though.. where I think it’s all types EXCEPT for your dual that can help you more easily in evicting closet skeletons. It speaks to what you said about different kinds of people being ideal for different seasons in one’s life. In my analogy, my point was that two well-oiled, cleaned pieces can work together in a machine. But they’re meant to work together in this cleaned state, only. They’re not meant to clean each other or oil one another up (except for maybe Alphas who are into that). I don’t think that truly “perfect” duals can have that additional “cleaning” function. That’s better suited for other “pieces of the puzzle”, or less-well-matched duals.

---

Ah, I see your point. This is an intriguing thought I haven't considered before about duality and it's kind of blowing my mind (if I'm understanding you correctly). It does make sense when I consider all the friends, companions, and helpers in my life. I've had Fi-dominant or auxiliary types prove to be incredibly valuable helping me heal personal issues or getting in touch with my own feelings and desires, but can't imagine an SLE helping me in that area. And I've definitely learned how to wield Fe by observing EIEs, or functioning in daily life from an Si-dom mom and roommate, etc.

Is it a little bit like you need to get your life/affairs in order, and then maybe you're finally ready to meet this mystical dual creature when you've reached a decent point of maturity and self-actualization? Which would make sense as to why a lot of people say it works better later in life.

@Lord Pixel, I'm often motivated the same way, to avoid risk/pain more than pursue something good. I didn't even realize that was a thing until a few years ago. "Knowing you can survive the loss of the relationship comes with the pleasure of feeling yourself get stronger as a result"--yes.

It's so interesting how this loss or risk can feel, in your words, fatal, on such a primal level. I suppose we're hardwired as children to know that abandonment = death since we have no way of fending for ourselves. It's only later in life we can acknowledge mentally that we won't die without someone. However, I don't think our bodies or feelings necessarily know that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Emily

Is it a little bit like you need to get your life/affairs in order, and then maybe you're finally ready to meet this mystical dual creature when you've reached a decent point of maturity and self-actualization? Which would make sense as to why a lot of people say it works better later in life.

---

Exactly. You can’t have “more” if you aren’t ready for it yet. Paradoxically, it’s when one is still full of cracks in their caulking that they want, and like to think they deserve “more” the most sometimes.

IEI social mission
The quadra is closing by Lyricist - Intuitive Ethical Introvert. Functions TR - the temporal intuition and the relational ethics - are determining his social mission, which we formulate as the Time of relations. And we decipher it like this: to foresee the development of relations and to correct them in a timely manner.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsfPqHgEbGA

Time change people (quote from old IEI)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o62fLnHDYLg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Emily

Does having a primarily secure attachment style cover "a multitude of sins" in a relationship, such as not being an ideal intertype relation? Just how significant is a secure attachment style, in your view? More powerful than duality? Or does it vary person to person?

I'm curious to hear any of your experiences with duality/insecurely attached individuals vs. non-duality/securely attached individuals. Or just words of wisdom...

The Story
It's on my mind after having several electrifying dates with an SLE-Ti. I'm 34, and prior to him have had no experience dating my dual. While I knew beyond doubt he was my dual, I also recognized quickly that he was not in a healthy place emotionally and had not done much work around his attachment style (fearful avoidant I'm guessing) or core wounds from family. It's not surprising that an SLE wouldn't have put in as much emotional/intuitive/healing work into themselves as an IEI by now, but I could see that he was rather volatile and unnecessarily combative, which didn't create feelings of safety in me. I knew I had to walk before getting too heavily invested. It was difficult (putting it mildly), because it's rare for me to feel such a strong connection to someone on all levels.

By contrast, I've had dates with non-duals, like a current SEI (who is very sweet) where I instantly feel safe, seen, valued, etc. He doesn't take offense or fly off the handle over small things. He doesn't take things personally.

Basically, he's Secure. And these people are such a breath of fresh air to me. A sigh of relief. It's a feeling I KNOW I want to have in my next relationship.

However, while I feel great peace and stability and self-worth with this SEI, I also don't feel particularly energized or drawn to him the way I do my dual. And I don't mean I need that "living-on-the-edge" adrenaline rush that unhealthy relationships tend to have. I mean what's missing is the Beta value of joining forces around a specific mission, of building a vision together that will propel us both forward. It feels like that would leave me unsatisfied/held back in the long run, though it feels peaceful now.

So it's a bit of a quandary for me. Do I just keep praying I'll one day meet that unicorn, an emotionally healthy, Secure SLE who happens to share my core beliefs? Haha, even typing that made me chuckle.

(As a side note, my longest-lasting friendships have mostly been with people I identify as Secure attachment--and a couple Fearful Avoidants--even if they're in the opposing quadra. Whereas I've had quick fallouts with same-quadra folks where our attachment styles triggered each other).

---

I have been with duals with insecure attachment styles (he's fearful-avoidant attachment style), and I have also been with non-dual types with secure attachment style. I'm an anxious preoccupied attachment style myself.

The dual type and I work quite well together despite our incompatible attachment styles, but the non-dual type and I broke up because there is something lacking in the relationship, he wanted to spend more time with me but I didn't want to spend more time with him because he just didn't intrigue me enough and I feel emotionally drained if I'm around him for long periods of time. I find his need to spend more time with me very exhausting, because he doesn't contribute to my happiness in any ways. This feeling was awful to have, and I find myself unable to meet his needs for more together time so I eventually broke up with him.
Also, the non-dual type doesn't support my ambitions. Would rather me be jobless than to have a career.
My dual type is the only one who supports my ambitions. My dual type truly listens to everything I said, rather than judging me and criticizing me.

It would be great if I can meet a dual with secure attachment style, but if I can't meet a dual with secure attachment style, and I have to choose between a dual type with insecure attachment style vs a non-dual type with secure attachment style, then I'd rather choose the former than the latter.

This would be how my romantic preferences would look like: Duals with secure attachment style > Duals with insecure attachment style > Non-duals with secure attachment style

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hermit Soul

This would be how my romantic preferences would look like: Duals with secure attachment style > Duals with insecure attachment style > Non-duals with secure attachment style

---

I like that you’re trying to organize this. In reality though I don’t think it’s that simple. What’s the sample size you’re going off of here? 2?

There’s much more variation than this in reality, I think.

@Hermit Soul, thanks for sharing your experience with a secure non-dual vs a non-secure dual. I think the romantic preferences hierarchy you listed would be my preference, too. I mean yes, there's always more subtlety to human relationships, and I don't think it's only duals that can be supportive towards your goals and dreams, but perhaps none do it so naturally as the dual. I clearly need to collect more personal experience in this area :lol:

I had a fearful-Avoidant ESI-Fi Dual relationship during this last year or so.

We got along fantastically well as Duals. We got along fairly poorly as a Secure and Fearful Avoidant couple.

The closer we got, the more she pulled back. At first, this wasn't obvious to me, but it soon did become obvious when she was always "busy with work" when I'd call her. So, I stopped calling her.

After about two months of hearing nothing from her, she contacted me again last week, wondering if I'd seen the lunar eclipse. (She knows I'm into Astronomy.) But then, right away, she launched into a complaint about her flooding garage floor, and why didn't I help her with that during the spring and summer?

Well, for one thing, I didn't know that it was the most important thing in the world to do. The Push-Pull of Fearful-Avoidance is pretty obvious here, but the benefits of good Duality and her beauty aren't enough to make dealing with it worthwhile.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/b...ful-attachment

After skimming this thread, I realized how stupid this theory of "attachments" is. Only thing left to happen is for there to organize a witch-hunt against anybody who doesn't seem to have a "secure" attachment style. What if this person with the "secure" attachment style, is a scumbag? What about love, is that not a factor? Stupid materialization of relationships and emotions that takes away all the magic...

Based on a close friendship of mine I believe that relationships between two insecure people can be deep, caring and have special meaning if you both persevere and believe there's something in common that keeps you together.

In my case we just grew to appreciate the entirety of each other (quirks and all) and to see our selves as equals, but challenged in different ways. Our friendship has progressed incredibly slowly due to walls I put up that I thought would have scared them away by now. If you consider that how someone reacts is often due to the sum of their life's experiences it seems most important to be patient if you really like the person - so you can arrive at that understanding.

The main idea I got from Attachment Theory is that a secure person's cup is full to overflowing, so they have less of this concern: "but what about me and my needs?"
This person won't experience much fear of being dismissed or forgotten about, or being voiceless and imposed upon. They generally feel more at ease giving and receiving love, but that doesn't mean that persons who experience feelings of anxiety/preoccupation and avoidance in their relationships are at the other extreme, and defective for it. I think it's better to think about it as a pattern of coping mechanism and something to accept as being there for a reason - the reason is valid.

The meaning of love as a blueprint of counsel and forging the supreme alliance covers more musical spheres and dancing constellations to bathe in the limitless and grant access to the higher arcanum, one where free umbrellas zip out cozy stars.

More simply, I view love as the cord that bridges and completes the bond within people to exist in dream bubbles that detach from reality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roger557

After skimming this thread, I realized how stupid this theory of "attachments" is. Only thing left to happen is for there to organize a witch-hunt against anybody who doesn't seem to have a "secure" attachment style. What if this person with the "secure" attachment style, is a scumbag? What about love, is that not a factor? Stupid materialization of relationships and emotions that takes away all the magic...

---

I have been summoned by thee @roger557. Ye tip the fedora so hard I'd almost wager you don't believe Jesus was born on the 25th of this month. So I must spell it out for ya.

Scumbags are usually the result of a vicious cycle and that cycle is spelled out in attachment theory. Same goes for whores/sluts/whatever horrible detritus of a human being you can dream up.

Truth is, if that "nightmare" scenario of yours ever happened they wouldn't get burned or killed. Instead, the "inquisitors" like myself would recommend they get flooded with hugs and kisses by everyone who knows and actually cares about them! Within reason of course. I have mentioned "the lost" several times and that refers to people so hopelessly and utterly broken even giving them what they need won't help them. They've melded their own sense of identity to concepts and ideologies that entail that they cannot ever be wrong about anything. As those who bear the burden of broken attachment styles fundamentally believe that they are as absolutely unlovable sacks of shit as surely as gravity is a thing, well, good luck fixing that.

That last bit you mentioned is most telling as well. It is those who have broken attachment who see everything in materialistic ways. Rapists and Serial Killers didn't see their victims as "people" as any healthy person would describe it. No. They were mere objects to them at the time and they had an urge. That object could serve to fulfill that urge so it got used to do so. Simple as.

Hehehe, now that I think on it I'm now getting how and why us Gamma's are so misunderstood by the other quadras and hated more often than not by the Alphas. The opposing quadra doesn't hate you so much is pulling their hair out in frustration. Yet for my side "hate" is a popular sentiment it seems. I actually get it now. No matter how you slice it, from the outside looking in you'd think we're either cold calculating/vengeful robots (NT's) or capricious/flighty lords of Chaos (SE's). The deeper the attachment issues the more that perception plays out in reality as that's how we tend to cope.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by End

I have been summoned by thee @roger577. Ye tip the fedora so hard I'd almost wager you don't believe Jesus was born on the 25th of this month. So I must spell it out for ya.

Scumbags are usually the result of a vicious cycle and that cycle is spelled out in attachment theory. Same goes for whores/sluts/whatever horrible detritus of a human being you can dream up.

Truth is, if that "nightmare" scenario of yours ever happened they wouldn't get burned or killed. Instead, the "inquisitors" like myself would recommend they get flooded with hugs and kisses by everyone who knows and actually cares about them! Within reason of course. I have mentioned "the lost" several times and that refers to people so hopelessly and utterly broken even giving them what they need won't help them. They've melded their own sense of identity to concepts and ideologies that entail that they cannot ever be wrong about anything. As those who bear the burden of broken attachment styles fundamentally believe that they are as absolutely unlovable sacks of shit as surely as gravity is a thing, well, good luck fixing that.

That last bit you mentioned is most telling as well. It is those who have broken attachment who see everything in materialistic ways. Rapists and Serial Killers didn't see their victims as "people" as any healthy person would describe it. No. They were mere objects to them at the time and they had an urge. That object could serve to fulfill that urge so it got used to do so. Simple as.

Hehehe, now that I think on it I'm now getting how and why us Gamma's are so misunderstood by the other quadras and hated more often than not by the Alphas. The opposing quadra doesn't hate you so much is pulling their hair out in frustration. Yet for my side "hate" is a popular sentiment it seems. I actually get it now. No matter how you slice it, from the outside looking in you'd think we're either cold calculating/vengeful robots (NT's) or capricious/flighty lords of Chaos (SE's). The deeper the attachment issues the more that perception plays out in reality as that's how we tend to cope.

---

Jesus didn't exist-- it's a lie to plant crappy beta nf values on the populace so they are more easily controlled.

Take this test: www.sociotypes.com/tests (original test)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roger557

Jesus didn't exist-- it's a lie to plant crappy beta nf values on the populace so they are more easily controlled.

Take this test: www.sociotypes.com/tests (original test)

---

Objectively false. It is a matter of the historic record and agreed upon by everyone with half a braincell to their name that Jesus was a real person and did exist. It is a matter of faith if you believe him to be the Christ or not (protip: He absolutely is). But as a matter of historic fact he did exist and is in fact real. There are innumerable dissertations, documentaries, etc. that lay it all out and I don't got the time nor the patience to spoon feed you these resources.

Do some research on your own on this front. I don't got time to exhaustively correct the mad and erroneous babblings of fedora tipping, blackpilled, demonically obsessed individuals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by End

Objectively false. It is a matter of the historic record and agreed upon by everyone with half a braincell to their name that Jesus was a real person and did exist. It is a matter of faith if you believe him to be the Christ or not (protip: He absolutely is). But as a matter of historic fact he did exist and is in fact real. There are innumerable dissertations, documentaries, etc. that lay it all out and I don't got the time nor the patience to spoon feed you these resources.

Do some research on your own on this front. I don't got time to exhaustively correct the mad and erroneous babblings of fedora tipping, blackpilled, demonically obsessed individuals.

---

You live in your own world dude. Not objetive like an ILI is supposed to be. Are you sure you're not a beta type? I would venture that you're an introverted EIE-Ni.

There is no evidence of Jesus. He might, or might no have existed. What's sure is that the teachings of the religion that carries his name are a control mechanism. Really.. "gave his son to die so that the sins of the world are taken away"? How does that solve anything? Sure, fair af executing innocents..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roger557

You live in your own world dude. Not objetive like an ILI is supposed to be. Are you sure you're not a beta type? I would venture that you're an introverted EIE-Ni.

There is no evidence of Jesus. He might, or might no have existed. What's sure is that the teachings of the religion that carries his name are a control mechanism. Really.. "gave his son to die so that the sins of the world are taken away"? How does that solve anything? Sure, fair af executing innocents..

---

I will indulge you this once and only once. It is patently obvious to anyone who does any serious research in this area that Jesus existed. Again, you can debate if he was the Christ or not but his existence within the historical record is unquestionable. Did Stalin exist? Was he real? What of the funny mustache man? He real? Here is a video from a man I admire greatly who would have (and did) put it far better than I can manage:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XA6aIhHzXkw

I doubt you'll watch it all the way through but do try to do so and give me your reaction. It is a datapoint I'm very interested in.