this might have been discussed before
Do you think some types are feminine and some are masculine?
If so, what would someone who is an anomaly to your categorization be like?
Are some types more feminine or masculine?
this might have been discussed before
Do you think some types are feminine and some are masculine?
If so, what would someone who is an anomaly to your categorization be like?
Stereotypically i would assume that ethical types are feminine and logical types are masculine.
However, since the 16 types don't discriminate between male and female it is logical to conclude that the only real fundamental difference between the sexes are the reproductive organs and resulting hormonal difference thus a discerning difference between the archetypes of hunter-gatherer (male) and family-producer (female) i.e. the reason why men traditionally court women. In essence, it doesn't matter if your black or white, consider the colour of your soul.
For example, an INTj female may appear to have stereotypical masculine traits of intution and logic although she may still have the instinctual drive to be a women and thus be courted by men. She may of course have many of the same problems and challenges faced by INTj men except from a different sexual viewpoint.
We could say, just for the fun of it, that the ninth function (i.e. beyond the id) is gender.
Remember to keep things simple and not any simpler like Einstein once said.
Agree. Mums seem also to be expected to be ISFJ (or perhaps just xSFJ, or xSFx).
No, there are feminit types and masculine types in Socionics. INFp and other NF types are the feminit and male NFs may have a problem with that being too unmenly. SF males it is easier. Sensing makes them little bit closer to ST men, who are the most masculine men of all types. ST women are the unfeminit women and may find trouble in being in role of a traditional woman.
SF women are the traditional women, the carriers of home. NT men are also masculine, but when they are N subtype, they are a bit feminite. NT women is the hardest to be for a woman- they can't cook well and they are not the best compared to SF women to take care of the children. I would like to know, what would Dmitri Lõtov say on this issue.
BTW. It seems to me, that among INFp males, there are the most large number of gay men. Not that I am one of them.
Semiotical process
Gender stereotypes are descriptive, not prescriptive.
All you can say is f.expl. "this type of behaviour is often associated with women/men". That's fair enough. But saying "this behaviour is often displayed by women/men" (like saying that "men aren't as emotional as women") is a bit risky, because our preconceptions always influence our judgment. Facts that fall outside the usual patterns - we sometimes honestly and truly "can't see them". We're blinkered, and we jump to conclusions. Not all the time, but it happens, and we've got to be careful in that area.
So if that sentence is risky, then going a step further and saying "this behaviour is often displayed by men/women... therefore it IS female/male" is riskier still. To be able to claim that, you have to observe a very large number of men/women and sift out all environmental influences. We could argue for hours on whether that is at all possible. It's difficult - we'd probably agree on that.
I guess most of us can live with it when people say we don't conform to some of the female/male stereotypes (or archetypes or expectations or whatever). We'd even be proud of it, perhaps. What's odd is when we're told that part of who we are isn't "female/male". It's schizophrenic. Interesting, in a way, because you get this yin-yang frisson, but still schizophrenic, because it can make you feel that you're a man through and through... except for your love of poetry (or whatever): that is female and therefore doesn't belong to you, you shouldn't have it, you should perhaps even be ashamed of it. I'm overdoing it here so it's clear what I'm getting at. Most times it isn't nearly as dramatic as that.
But for people who don't fit the gender stereotypes, it can make life harder than it should be. If goal-oriented and ambitious women are made to feel that these qualities are "masculine", and dreamy, quiet, sensitive guys who love poetry and hate sports are made to feel "feminine", that can make it unnecessarily difficult for them to accept their character while also accepting their femininity/masculinity. (I say "can", not "always does".) A love of business is obviously female, because there are women who have it. And a love of poetry and emotionality is obviously male, because there are men who have it. Who's to decide otherwise?
That's not to say that there aren't personality traits or types of behaviour that are truly masculine or feminine. The problem is merely: who gets to decide what these are? Gender stereotypes change over time. (Even scientific opinion on sex and gender changes over time.) An example: is everything to do with "business" masculine or feminine? In the Bible there's one eulogy on a good woman who says she's the one who buys property (that should appeal to Joy :wink: ). In the 19th century buying property would have been considered to be "unfeminine", because everything connected to business was considered to be "masculine".
Or take poetry. A guy who writes poems: is he "masculine" or "feminine"? Some people would say that writing poems is a bit feminine, but then how do you explain Ted Hughes or Thom Gunn? And so on, and so on, from the great to the small. Guys generally don't wear tights and feathered hats nowadays. They don't wear skirts either (feminine), just kilts (masculine). It's all subjective, illogical and complex.
I’ve always been pretty “feminine” in the commonly accepted sense of that word. It’s never really bothered me.
Masculinities and femininities vary and shift greatly from era to era and from time to time. Our gender expectations today are a result of a peculiar set of circumstances in our history and events going on today. Part of our gender stereotyping is arbitrary and artificial; part of it is born out of biologically intuitive inclinations.
Most gay men I know are actually ESFp.
Statistically, F types are more represented among women while T types are more represented among men. This has already been proved by several independent researches, yet Jung himself had noticed this fact.
This does not necessarily make T women "masculine" or F men "feminine", it just can make them feel a "minority", which is especially unpleasant in conservative, traditional societies.
However, such distribution has biological sense, just because F types are more capable of emphasizing their attractivity (and most famous Don Juans and Lovelaces belonged to F types). When there are too many F men, it should result in higher number of casual sexual contacts and higher number of children (which finally results in lack of resources, hunger and wars). And by contrast, when there are too many T women, it may increase the average age of marriage (just because the process of dating becomes too complicated), as it is in Germany today (where people usually marry at the age of 30-35).
www.socioniko.net is no longer my site.
why would it make biological sense to marry at a younger age?
Sorry for my ignorance.
The younger you start trying to have kids, the less chance you'll have infertility problems.Originally Posted by ms k
Edited to add: AND when the infant mortality rate was higher, people had larger families knowing that not all the kids would reach adulthood - and the earlier you start having kids the more you can have. Not so applicable these days when most people have around 2.
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.-Mark Twain
You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.
Age and reproduction. Everything that I have learned about this lovely thing we call procreation points to it being biologically ideal for men to have children no later than 30 and women between 18 and 30. This is based on statistics about genetic mutations (which I put a fair amount of reading into because my current husband has a hereditary condition) and all that I learned about pregnancy and childbirth in the insane amount of reading I did while I was pregnant with my son.
As a female ENTp, I do see how our current society pressures women to be more xxFj, but... I don't care. LOL Besides, there are a lot of people who are attracted to T women and F men. I may not think like most women, but I wouldn't say I'm masculine. No one who has met me has accused me of being manly. Acting like a man, yes. Being manly, no. I wear a cute little dress as well as any woman I know! So though I may not have a very feminine attitude, I do have a feminine appearance.
And I think there has been some confusion about femine vs. nurturing. I may not have a femine attitude or mindset, but I'm a very nurturing person. I have always had a very strong maternal instinct. I have enjoyed caring for children my entire life, and in my adult life I have come into some trouble being overly concerned with the wellness and comfort of others. (And if anyone says I'm an friggin F I'm gonna hunt em down and cause much suffering!) I am one of the most compassionate people you'll meet, but I'm logical in my thought processes. The starving African villiage for example... no, I woudn't save them. I could go on about that for a while, but won't... I also live by the "Give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, feed him for life" philosophy. Very important...
Anyways... it all comes down to what "masculine" and "feminine" mean to a person/culture. BTW, "manly" men irritate me... they always seem to have something to prove, and I just don't find conversation with them as interesting as with others. This may have something to do with the whole S/N thing though."Manly" men are also a little too brave for my tastes. That's sorta a really big deal to me... *refrains yet again from yet another rant*
I am sorry. I may have misunderstood the terms of feminit and masculine. I didn't mean that F types act too much like women and T women are like men.
For me it is rather in a scale Femine<----->Masculine and everione are on that scale. Some types may just naturally be into more to Feminite or masculine. Bat it doesn't have to be largly into ''wrong scale'', this could be a bit too drastic. I don't think that F male would be in that area in the scale ,where women are. F male are just understanding more better women's world, which is cool. At least I have noticed that F men know well how women think,at least, compeared to me. And that is what I meant. But everione can learn how to understand opposite sex better.
But are there feminit and masculine elements in the types? Dmitri? For example men have feminit element in them selfs, what Jung called as the Anima and F types are better in contact with their Anima? Or am I bullsing again.
Semiotical process
So in conclusion we can say that stereotypes are created by the democratic nature of society fueled by the media and racism etc., archetypes exist as roles for people to play as required for survival and socio-types exist randomly that bridge the gap between the sexes where the key difference biologically is the reproductive organs.
Remember to keep things simple and not any simpler like Einstein once said.
I don't think there's anything wrong with innate/natural masculinity. I respect that. What I find annoying are the guys you see (just about everywhere) who are so insecure about their own masculinity that they attempt to ward off any signs of femininity in their personality by adopting stereotypical masculine behavior that doesn't come naturally to them. They often take on mysogynistic, homophobic, reactionary mindsets. They end up looking like dumbasses, who - as you put it - "have something to prove."BTW, "manly" men irritate me... they always seem to have something to prove, and I just don't find conversation with them as interesting as with others. This may have something to do with the whole S/N thing though.
I think what people are saying is that masculinity and femininity aren't set in stone, and exact standards. There are some behaviors/modes of thought that are more common in men, and other more common in females. However, there are enough exceptions that the traditional gender roles (which aren't exactly traditional... look not too far into the past or to different cultures and you'll see sometimes that traditionally masculine/feminine behaviors are sometimes even switched) don't decribe innate behavior as much.
I do believe that certain types exhibit masculine/feminine behaviors in the 20th century Western sense. We are more accepting of men who display our ideas of masculinity and more accepting of women who display our ideas of femininity. People will typically display the Western notions of feminity in some aspects of their behavior, and masculinity in other parts of their personality.
"To thine own self be true." - Billy the Bard
If we had no sense of masculinity to femininity we'd perhaps be more bi-sexual, an ambigious state of sexuality.
Remember to keep things simple and not any simpler like Einstein once said.
And that's precisely what some people believe we actually in truth are. (ala, Kinsey) In the end, it's not so much a sense of masculinity/feminity, but a sense of polarity - concordia discors was quite a popular philosophy once. It's a philosophy that is present in Socionics in the idea of duality <- that which is absent in ourself, we tend to value in our "better half."
I think 3 is the magic number with the concept of polarity.
-tive: homosexuality
-/+tive: bi-sexuality (limbo state)
+tive: hetrasexuality
Not implying that i'm homophobic though i wish to show the effects of each on the nature of procreation and population growth/stagnation/decline.
Remember to keep things simple and not any simpler like Einstein once said.
well its still a little fuzzy for me to say that the social practices of social institutions are a result of biology. the case for the connection can be made but i am not going to make it.
are you INTj intuitive subtype?
im big on thought experiments.
He's an Intuitive-ethical Intratim...are you INTj intuitive subtype?
im big on thought experiments.
Does "Intratim" as opposed to "Introvert" imply that the type is predominantly introverted i.e. not simply of an introvert stereotype?
Remember to keep things simple and not any simpler like Einstein once said.
Well.. no.
http://babelfish.altavista.com/babel...ushra%2f3.html
.. just think of it as meaning an "introverted person".
and do you still think I am LII? yep i am still thinking it over.
Sure.. why not? The original impression I got from your description was that you were Ti dominant.
I do believe that the Archetypes are real. And the ideas of Jung are perhaps one of the most innovative ideas of the 20th century. He got recogniton also from the physicists. And some of ideas are still unclear and need research.
I agree with you ,Baby. Men can cry too. :wink:
Semiotical process
Oh reallY? Why do you NOT think that you are IEI?Unless you want to completely redefine IEI / INFp, then this statement is incorrect.
Of course, nothing I can say will ever change this sentiment from Rocky, so I suppose it is pointless to try...
Could you explain what you mean here? I'm interested... I really think you had something with the differentiation of the masculine and feminine functions, though:
This is the stereotypical male function, isn't it? Raw physical force.- Raw force and will is increased in men.
Most political figures, also, I believe play on this.- Most world spiritual leaders.
And as Dmitri Lytov mentioned, most of our Don Juan archetypal figures have been Fs. Lusty, tempestuous, vengeful are all- Can't hide feelings.
This also might be a clue into the traditionally male realms of science and government.- Rules, generalizations, and logical analysis.
*"come on" look* Now you're an INTj, Transigent? Do you really expect people to believe that?No concern for "aesthetics" or "beauty" in my environment. I can "do" art, but I don't have much concern for "artistic" things.
While I am nowhere near unemotional, I do not let the displaying of emotions take priority in any event. Sure, it is nice to be lighthearted, but when it comes down to it, I see my own and others emotions as something that just happens, and you have to deal with it. The INFp seems to be at home in this realm, where I only use it as a tool or a guide, and not the beginning and end to my life.
In short, the "human" aspects of life is something that I don't really dwell over. It is like they are a facinating trinket, but not something that I put in the center of my house. The INFp seems to breathe the "human" aspects of life, whereas I just have a taste here and there.
If there were two functions that I could identify with, it would be
I strongly believe that I am INTj, and this would be 100% clear if I was put in a "nerd" body, however, the fact that I am not the traditional "nerd" makes it tough to reconcile the "descriptions" of INTj (esp. on socionics.com) where he is supposed to be a total fearful pushover....of which I probably WOULD be if I was about 6 inches shorter, and dorkier.
It seems clear now that J/P is not what it seems to be at first glance, so now I am comfortable in thinking that I could, in fact, be "J" because "J" does not necessarily mean that one is completely inflexible. In fact, a weak point of
Sorry for going off-topic, but I can't leave things like this alone.
Binary or dichotomous systems, although regulated by a principle, are among the most artificial arrangements that have ever been invented. -- William Swainson, A Treatise on the Geography and Classification of Animals (1835)
Why wouldn't we believe it? He never really struck me as INFp anyway.Do you really expect people to believe that?
Because "he never really struck me as INFp anyway" is about as subjective as subjective can get.
Binary or dichotomous systems, although regulated by a principle, are among the most artificial arrangements that have ever been invented. -- William Swainson, A Treatise on the Geography and Classification of Animals (1835)
Obviously.I must have missed the objective clues that he was INFp, then.
Er, that's not to say that I sincerely believe he's INFp. And there were never any objective clues.
Binary or dichotomous systems, although regulated by a principle, are among the most artificial arrangements that have ever been invented. -- William Swainson, A Treatise on the Geography and Classification of Animals (1835)
Anyway.... This discussion about type and gender got me thinking. I used to become downhearted because I did not fit in. I was not stereotypically male and I certainly was not female. I gradually started to notice that I had a freedom that fell outside of this stereotype, all kinds of stereotypes in fact. I could be what ever I wanted depending on the situation. I had no fear or difficulty talking about my feelings, or being tender nor did I have fear of being seen as blunt or forceful. Once I stopped worrying about how others might percieve me I started getting more acceptance. Men who were afraid to talk about certain things felt comfortable talking to me and women too. All their activities were open to me. I started seeing examples of how in history women and men have done many, many task that dont agree with modern stereotypes. I have seen in areas were other men have backed down in fear that certain ones stood up. They didnt have to defend their fragile ego. I think the strength came from dealing with this lesson in life long ago when they were young, at a time when those who fit in felt no pressure. Sure there are some that dont understand me, dont like me for whatever reason. I dont think they would no matter how I tried to be and I dont need them to. Life is way too full to worry about it.
Topaz
The artifact which is the source of my power will not be kept on the Mountain of Despair beyond the River of Fire guarded by the Dragons of Eternity. It will be in my safe-deposit box. The same applies to the object which is my one weakness.
I don't believe Transigent is an intj. No way; he's just messin with us.
Entp
ILE
Housework. Redecorating the flat, moving all the furniture around. Regulating the children's (and husband's) behaviour. Female. :wink: (Male complaint: "Why can't you let things be as they are?")This is the stereotypical male function, isn't it? Raw physical force.
...commonly associated with women, at least in literature and some branches of philosophy and religious thought through the ages. Fe as in Female. Don Juan et.al. fit into the female stereotype, so women could identify with them... hence the attraction. (That's not what I really believe, but it IS a possible theory.)And as Dmitri Lytov mentioned, most of our Don Juan archetypal figures have been Fs. Lusty, tempestuous, vengeful are all
...and to the traditionally female realms of educating children and making up recipes (=government and chemistry).This also might be a clue into the traditionally male realms of science and government.
I just love to make things complicated.
Lol, that last post of yours is hiliarious!
Entp
ILE
Totally!!!Lol, that last post of yours is hiliarious!
Topaz
The artifact which is the source of my power will not be kept on the Mountain of Despair beyond the River of Fire guarded by the Dragons of Eternity. It will be in my safe-deposit box. The same applies to the object which is my one weakness.
That's sad, Ishy. What an ass.
<--- Me pouring out all my love on you!
Some days its just not worth chewing through the restraints.
Gay couples sometimes have kids too, yes? So what's the problem of this guy?
You know, I've always wondered that if everyone turned gay right now, it would mean the end of the human race.
Binary or dichotomous systems, although regulated by a principle, are among the most artificial arrangements that have ever been invented. -- William Swainson, A Treatise on the Geography and Classification of Animals (1835)
Transigent, I think you have the wrong idea about. Si+ is the femine version you are thinking of, but Si- is so very, very diffrent.
+Si
the ability to feel the physical properties of the objects of the nearest environment.
tendency toward the cosiness and the skill it to create in the limited space.
the skill to surround itself by beautiful things.
aesthetics and the accordion of object, ergonomics of object.
tendency toward the satisfaction of its physical needs (sibaritstvo), the skill to avoid discomfort.
memory to the personal physical sensations, the ability to reproduce them.
orientation to the information about the close surrounding space, obtained through the well developed sensory organs, directed toward the pleasant sensations, weakening, enjoyment, pleasure.
tendency toward the tactile contact: the sensitivity of touchs.
health as the collection of the sensations of body.
-Si
the ability to feel interaction of the physical properties of objects in the space.
tendency toward the comfort and the skill it to create on the large space.
tendency toward the satisfaction of the physical needs on a scale of society.
the aesthetics of space.
ergonomics of space, topographical design.
tendency toward the new physical sensations: the collectivization of sensations; - the skill to identify, to foresee discomfort, pain, disease, disharmony.
tendency toward the tactile contact as the method of the collection of information about the physical properties of objects.
... so, if you have, then you don't care about those things. Si- is the masuline version of Si +, in other words.
Reply With Quote
