Minimalist supervision descriptions

These are minimalist, non-PC descriptions of how a supervisor sees their supervisee:

ESFj on ISTp: "can't behave properly and never wants to do anything"
ENTp on ISTj: "logical but no imagination, no lateral thinking, would be lost without an instruction manual"
INTj on ENFp: "lots of crazy, inconsistent ideas, always on the move but in all directions"
ISFp on ENFj: "too restless and is all to no good purpose, at the same time is hopeless with real work"

ENFj on INTp: "has no idea what impression s/he's making on others, hopeless"
ESTp on INTj: "intelligent perhaps but no backbone and unfit for the real world"
ISTj on ESFp: "makes absolutely no sense, totally chaotic, a loose cannon"
INFp on ESFj: "says and does a lot without ever getting anywhere"

ENTj on INFp: "lots of lofty goals but clueless as to how to get there, lives in dream world"
ESFp on INFj: "too nice, no backbone, unfit for the real world"
ISFj on ESTp: "how can anyone trust them?"
INTp on ESTj: "rushes into doing things without knowing where to go"

ESTj on ISFp: "lazy and can't do anything right"
ENFp on ISFj: "set on their ways, without imagination, or always expecting the worst"
INFj on ENTp: "how can anyone trust them?"
ISTp on ENTj: "too restless and is all to no good purpose, at the same time is hopeless with real work"

Very nice. Many of them seem accurate. I'm most critical about the INTp-ESTj because ESTjs DO get somewhere. They generally get anywhere they wish to go. Perhaps even more so than INTps. INTp-ESTj could be more related to INTp being critical of ESTjs rushing forward without quite understanding where they are going or where they should be going (and unfairly criticizing other people who don't follow them). Sort of lacking big picture view but still being overly confident of their direction. I'm not sure how to put it shortly and how much it conflicts with what you meant. I can see how the description fits better on INFp-ESFj than INTp-ESTj. INTp probably wouldn't criticize ESTj for talking too much but instead "doing too much too soon " or something. I might be wrong but this is my current impression.

Another point to add here that supervision seems better than its reputation (perhaps the name "supervision" has too negative sound to it). Supervision is actually one of the most common relations between the long term couples I know.

Supervision is the most common relationship between long-term couples you know? Wow. Almost all long-term couples I know are either duals or mirrors. I'm surprised how many mirror long-term couples I know. Anyway, that's another issue.

The ESFj/ISTp one seems accurate for my husband and his mom.

I don't think ISFjs are really boring. Maybe this is a bias because my little brother, whom I love dearly, is an ISFj. I guess I feel more worried that they aren't able to see that things might not turn out as badly as they think. But, again, this is due potentially to specific issues with my brother.

My husband has said something like what you said the ISTp/ENTj thing about my mom. "She's always wanting you to take her places for no good reason." And he thinks both my mom and my ENFj dad are pretty hopeless as far as taking care of things, so that part is usually said about both of them, not just her.

No, these were good points, I will change it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slacker Mom

Supervision is the most common relationship between long-term couples you know? Wow. Almost all long-term couples I know are either duals or mirrors. I'm surprised how many mirror long-term couples I know. Anyway, that's another issue.

---

Perhaps one of us has problems reliably typing people :D (lol, meaning it could be either one of us). Or it is just a coincidence since my set is statistically pretty small.

Anyways with my current typings I know ISTj(m)-ESFp(f) couple, ESTj(m)-ISFp(f), ESFp(f)-INFj(m), another ESFp(f) - INFj(m), ISFj(m)-ESTp(f), probably another ISFj(m)-ESTp(f). Hmm...was that all...then of course here in the forum you have oyburger living in a relations of supervision, Kristiina in a relations of supervision, and Herzy's parents in the relations of supervision. I bet there are more. So it seems not to be that rare for reason or another.

At socionics.com it says:
"Supervision partners often look like good friends. The reason for this is that in these relations both partners can sense their social value: the Supervisor as a "guardian angel", without whom the Supervisee will get into trouble, and the Supervisee as the object of attention."

The fact that they have well defined roles in the relationships makes it more stabile than many other relations. E.g. I'm not sure if supervision couples fight really that much when they are left alone. While not alone arguments and fights are much more common. And of course the supervisee has to sort of "submit" to their inferior role but this seems not be a problem because they often respect the supervisor's abilities to easily do what is hard for them. So they learn to submit willingly in these issues. Ok, some people might never submit to this inferior role but it seems many don't mind it after the initial establishment period of the relations. Especially women seem to think it is safe to make children with their supervisor because they are somehow so capable in difficult issues which they are afraid of. Brings a sense of security. Or I have just mistyped everyone :P

I've known couples of this sort, just I guess most don't make it to the point where I'd define them as "long-term". An ENFp friend was with an INTj for about 5 years though. I could see how it could work if they had outside people to support them functionally. And I made another post about that, largely because we need more active posts around here, but whatever.

I think knowing about Socionics would hopefully help people here if they're in relationships of supervision because they wouldn't take things personally when there was conflict, they'd see it for what it was and move on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expat

INFj on ENTp: "how can anyone trust them?"

---

I absolutely agree.
Btw, it would be nice to read about descriptions of conflicting relations as well. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slacker Mom

I've known couples of this sort, just I guess most don't make it to the point where I'd define them as "long-term".

---

They are from 2-3 years to lots of years. I can see how the problems get worse in the long run. Especially after the basic home building, child raising part is over and they actually have to concentrate on each other. When young the physical interaction seems to play a big role. After age of 30 the fulfilling of the daily needs of the family seem to play a big role. Around age 40-50 there could be huuuuge troubles ahead but it is a long time before that happens for many of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XoX

The fact that they have well defined roles in the relationships makes it more stabile than many other relations. E.g. I'm not sure if supervision couples fight really that much when they are left alone. While not alone arguments and fights are much more common. And of course the supervisee has to sort of "submit" to their inferior role but this seems not be a problem because they often respeo they learn to submit willingly in these issues. Ok, some people might never submit to this inferior role but it seems many don't mind it after the initial establishment period of the relations. Especially women seem to think it is safe to make children with their supervisor because they are somehow so capable in difficult issues which they are afraid of. Brings a sense of security. Or I have just mistyped everyone :P

---

I agree, among the fairly small number of long term couples I have reliably typed, relations of supervision is a common pairing - and typically with the man being the supervisor to the woman.

I agree with the ones I have experience with.

I just think that there's the most attraction with supervisors. I consistently have the highest amount of physical attraction with ISFjs. By the way, I never submit to them, I just get very angry and volatile (not always - only when they direct Se towards me).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expat

ESTp on INTj: "intelligent perhaps but no backbone and unfit for the real world"
ESFp on INFj: "too nice, no backbone, unfit for the real world"

---

that's spot on. while the supervisor can be enthralled by some unique traits of their supervisee, they can accuse the supervisee of being naive, boring and having no real life (not exciting/not active) when pissed off. the ones i've observed are all young people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FDG

I consistently have the highest amount of physical attraction with ISFjs.

---

Who wouldn't? :o

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FDG

I consistently have the highest amount of physical attraction with ISFjs.

---

Who wouldn't? :o

---

Ehm yes :lol: but it's...mutual? Which usually isn't with other types that I can be phisically attracted to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FDG

I just think that there's the most attraction with supervisors.

---

Not attracted to my supervisor at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UDP II

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FDG

I just think that there's the most attraction with supervisors.

---

Not attracted to my supervisor at all.

---

How about supervisee?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expat

ESFj on ISTp: "can't behave properly and never wants to do anything"

---

Sounds accurate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eunice

Btw, it would be nice to read about descriptions of conflicting relations as well. :)

---

Yes please! :D :wink:

Don't really know any.

Knowing of them, I don't know if I would find them attractive -- they would probably seem too unstable for me. But I don't know any in person.


I'm very selective, but it doesn't bother me.

Quote:

---

Only sincere feelings expressed by the eyes and intonations can win him over.

---

That, taken from the16types ISTp description, and speaking about ENFps, is true for me.

Unified description for all conflicting relations: "WHAT?! What the hell is she talking about?! She doesn't know anything about anything and she has her priorities all wrong! I can't imagine how she gets from one day to the next."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FDG

I just think that there's the most attraction with supervisors. I consistently have the highest amount of physical attraction with ISFjs. By the way, I never submit to them, I just get very angry and volatile (not always - only when they direct Se towards me).

---

I agree. I had a crush on an ESFp once.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XoX

How about supervisee?

---

Yup. I can be attracted to the ENTps I meet IRL 'cos they are tall, athletic and staggeringly handsome.

Until they open their mouths.

They are very good in coming out with new ideas and think that they can work even though I admit that the ideas sound half-baked sometimes. What surprises me is that the way they talk about their out-of-the-world ideas is as if the ideas are feasible even though they are not. They have this amazing ability to convince others to support their ideas even though they are impractical. The ENTps I know IRL are very intelligent, but they have no goals in life and like to do things according to their whims and fancies. Moreover, they are very immature, and I feel as if I'm an older sister to them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kristiina

Unified description for all conflicting relations: "WHAT?! What the hell is she talking about?! She doesn't know anything about anything and she has her priorities all wrong! I can't imagine how she gets from one day to the next."

---

I think it does apply to many cases.

I don't think I've ever been attracted to a male INTj, but with female INTjs - like other moms I know who are INTjs - I am awed by them and how together they seem to be.

Anyway, I've found out that relationship of supervision are much less applicable when both parties have a certain degree of maturity. For example, most ESTps and ENTps I've met through college are far more responsible than their counterparts I used to meet everywhere. The supervision comes out as a "vibe" in those cases. I can't even explain what it is but I'm sure that all the people that have experienced it know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eunice

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expat

INFj on ENTp: "how can anyone trust them?"

---

I absolutely agree.
Btw, it would be nice to read about descriptions of conflicting relations as well. :)

---

those of benefit wouldn't be useless either :wink:

i think supervision can seem too parental sometimes.

ILE>LSI: "Smart, but makes things way too complicated."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Diana

Heh, both INFjs and ISFjs see their supervisees as "How can anyone trust them?" hmm, lol.

---

That's how I best summarized how Fi IJ sees Fi PoLR EP.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilligan

ILE>LSI: "Smart, but makes things way too complicated."

---

That's interesting. Complicated how?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kristiina

Unified description for all conflicting relations: "WHAT?! What the hell is she talking about?! She doesn't know anything about anything and she has her priorities all wrong! I can't imagine how she gets from one day to the next."

---

I think it does apply to many cases.

---

wouldn't this be more likely in quasi-identical relations :?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by he died with a felafel

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eunice

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expat

INFj on ENTp: "how can anyone trust them?"

---

I absolutely agree.
Btw, it would be nice to read about descriptions of conflicting relations as well. :)

---

those of benefit wouldn't be useless either :wink:

---

I can try, but conflicting relationships are much more difficult to describe in one sentence than supervision. The supervisee is someone whom you see as exposed to you: you believe you thoroughly understand where they are coming from and what they are trying to accomplish - and you see what they are doing wrong in your opinion. You don't feel like the supervisee has much to teach you.

The conflictor is more ambiguous, since you don't really understand where they are coming from, and you realize that they are more confident than you in many areas.

As for benefit -- that sounds almost as difficult. I will think about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XoX

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UDP II

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FDG

I just think that there's the most attraction with supervisors.

---

Not attracted to my supervisor at all.

---

How about supervisee?

---

i think it can go both ways.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ms. Kensington

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XoX

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UDP II

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FDG

I just think that there's the most attraction with supervisors.

---

Not attracted to my supervisor at all.

---

How about supervisee?

---

i think it can go both ways.

---

anal and vaginal

Expat, those are all really good. Supervision is pretty easy to notice IRL.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expat

ESFj on ISTp: "can't behave properly and never wants to do anything"

---

I've seen this one; you could refine it a little. Essentially "like a lump, completely unresponsive. Lazy."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilligan

ILE>LSI: "Smart, but makes things way too complicated."

---

That's typical generic Alpha NT criticism. I say "you're making things way too complicated" as a matter of course.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FDG

Anyway, I've found out that relationship of supervision are much less applicable when both parties have a certain degree of maturity. For example, most ESTps and ENTps I've met through college are far more responsible than their counterparts I used to meet everywhere. The supervision comes out as a "vibe" in those cases. I can't even explain what it is but I'm sure that all the people that have experienced it know.

---

IME the more mature someone is the more likely they are to avoid supervision relations in the first place, especially as the supervisee. It's an easy trap to fall into; I have trouble distinguishing ENFps and ESFjs. I also think people who like being the supervisor tend to be insecure and sensitive to criticism.

My ISTj mother has been married twice. Now she is engaged to an ESFp, and I think she was attracted to the relationship because it was not too challenging. It was a pretty difficult divorce, but now the relationship is starting to wear on them both. It turned out to be a worse move than she expected, because she is constantly stressed and he can't do anything to help.

My point: supervision bad. Also, spay or neuter your pets. Thank you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mea

HAHAHA! a lump! LOL! I dunno. I don't think ISTps are as lazy as they are made to sound. It's more like a stereotype IMO. LOL, that was funny nonetheless.

---

It's not about their being lazy in an objective way, it's about their being perceived as such by ESFjs in this case.

[...]

It seems fair to say that the criticisms of a Supervisor exaggerate the Supervisee's weakness, being perceptually magnified by the supervisor's innate giftedness.

[...]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XoX

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UDP II

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FDG

I just think that there's the most attraction with supervisors.

---

Not attracted to my supervisor at all.

---

How about supervisee?

---

I know an ENFp girl and she is really cool, though irritating at times.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by astralsilky

(INFj) emotionally overwrought, hypersensitively aware, and stirs up excessive psychic content in their environment;

---

Astralsilky (or anyone else who got it), Would you explain further what you mean by "stirs up excessive psychic content in their environment".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by astralsilky

(INFj) emotionally overwrought, hypersensitively aware, and stirs up excessive psychic content in their environment;

---

Astralsilky (or anyone else who got it), Would you explain further what you mean by "stirs up excessive psychic content in their environment".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kristiina

Unified description for all conflicting relations: "WHAT?! What the hell is she talking about?! She doesn't know anything about anything and she has her priorities all wrong! I can't imagine how she gets from one day to the next."

---

I realize this is an old thread, but I am bumping it bc this is so excellent.

In grad school I had an LSI on my thesis committee, and while we had a lot of respect for each other intellectually and otherwise, she seemed genuinely perplexed by my writing process, structure (or maybe lack thereof, from her perspective), and final product as well. It was extremely frustrating for us both, and when I finally finished writing and re-writing the thing to her liking (after having help from an ESI in figuring out what she was after) it felt more like escaping.

What's interesting about @Kristiina's description is that my SLI husband and I sometimes jokingly say something to each other like, "How did you survive without me all those years?" referring to the other's poor demonstration of whatever weak function (of course we're not consciously thinking about socionics [he doesn't even know much about it], but we're still referring to what socionics describes). But it's a kind, good-natured ribbing rather than outright criticism and bafflement like from a conflictor.

I had a (very competent, very lovely) boss who was LSE, E1. She was a worrier, and felt like she had to personally ensure every document that left the office was perfect. So she would sit down with me and tell me about all the changes I should be making, and usually I had missed the main argument, was too vague, or even too "intense" (I compensated by going out of my way to be elaborately Ti-seeking). In the end she would tell me how each idea should lead into the next, step by step, but the end result often didn't look like what she had meant, so we would have to redraft. She probably ended up doing a lot of my work herself. And eventually I was laid off, and she was very sweet during the sendoff, but I wonder if we were both relieved.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expat

INTj on ENFp: "lots of crazy, inconsistent ideas, always on the move but in all directions"

---

Occasionally I might think that but that's not really what irritates me the most about ENFp. I'm more likely to be irritated by their failure to grasp and/or disregard for logical principles and systems.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expat

ESTp on INTj: "intelligent perhaps but no backbone and unfit for the real world"

---

I think that's a fair assessment on how an ESTp likely perceives me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expat

ESFj on ISTp: "can't behave properly and never wants to do anything"

---

That fits the relationship between my ESFj mother and my ISTp father almost perfectly.

Was it DarkAngelFireWolf69 who said you reach intellectual breakthroughs only within the supervision circle??

I live with my supervisor (non romantic relationship). Additionally, my supervisor is also the co-owner of the company for which I work. I have a paternal aunt who is also an ENTJ. I've noticed that I want to curse out both most of the time. I recognize their need to always appear intelligent to the point they miss the entire purpose of the conversation. It's interesting how supervision is very literal in my case and I suspect it's often the case with supervision (I don't know as I'm only recently getting into intertype relationships). I also realize that my current situation was concocted by the NTJ. It's gone on for so long that people now forget the original arrangement. I moved in to help her during her family ill-health situations (since she's single). Before moving in, I was living with someone with whom I was considering marrying (he is actually her supervisor funny enough), so I wasn't in need of anything, so to speak. Now this situation is presented to others as if she's helping me. Yes, I will be rectifying this situation soon. However, I just find it interesting that instead of acknowledging that I'm the original person offering help, it's portrayed as if I'm the one who needed help.

Both think they know me, which is false. I only show my surface self when interacting with them. I couldn't imagine having a long-term, romantic relationship with an ENTJ. It would turn violent.