Betas how do you feel about "being sweet"?

[UDP]

This may be a fairly staightforward Si/Se + erotic roles aspect

But, betas, we know you like intensity and passion in relationships. But how do you feel about being very sweet to your significant other? What would "being sweet" to someone mean? Would you want someone to be sweet to you? Why or why not?

I'm not saying "sweet" as in "nice" - because of course everyone wants to be treated well.
I don't want to say "lovey dovey", or like the whole "smoopy smoopy" sienfeld thing.
I want to get some specifics on what about infantile/caregiver interactions are unappealing to beta's aggressor/victim ways - and here it from beta.


If we can figure out something concrete here, perhaps it can be a major indicator in terms of alpha/delta (si) vs beta/gamma quadras (se)
Talking with some gammas, it was clear as to why I am not gamma very easily based on how I really want to act in a relationship.

[Mediator Kam]

I just talked to my ENFj friend, and she couldn't understand the question I was asking her for a while. Then I gave her big examples of what "being sweet" meant,such as caring, checking to see how the connections between you and him are holding up, and she said "Really cute" and "id be like awwww".

After asking her if she would do that, she said "heck yeah" and "I'm like that".

[ScarlettLux]

It's just ... BORING! I want some fire, some spice! Not to have things easy all the time, ya'know?
Infantile men annoy me so much, it's not even funny. They are constantly gallivanting around trying to get my attention when I really just want them to lay me some
Caregiver men seem stable, just monotone and flat.
Aggressors get me going ahaha... really though - I like to be pursued and play a little game with their minds before giving in. However, when I do give in, it's pretty awesome even though I would spice things up now and then to keep the feeling "alive." It's not cruel, I don't really like that perpetuated stereotype on Victim/Aggressor relationships. I think it's the connotation we give to those two terms. It's more like.. Victims hint at what we want done to us/or just want ... and the Aggressor is like taking the bait or something. They act on stuff we only think about.

[FDG]

I think pretty much every couple does that to an extent. I wouldn't trace it back to functional preference you know.

[UDP]

I think pretty much every couple does that to an extent. I wouldn't trace it back to functional preference you know.

No, see - SL knows what I'm talking about.

It's just ... BORING! Laughing I want some fire, some spice! Not to have things easy all the time, ya'know?

And I, inherently, don't want that.
I know betas don't want constant fighting all the time - I get that. But when they do want...

I like to be pursued and play a little game with their minds before giving in

A little bit is ok, but only at very, very small amounts.

Infantile men annoy me so much, it's not even funny. They are constantly gallivanting around trying to get my attention when I really just want them to lay me some Extraverted Sensing Razz
Caregiver men seem stable, just monotone and flat.

And from my perspective, that is exactly what I want.


So it seems from a gamma perspective, really going into caregivermode makes them feel disgusted or weak or dependent, which is unappealing. It is not "strong". And from beta, it is just boring and dull, flat - no action or romance, no enticement.

Maybe it's just me, but, how people really want to act - and what they enjoy - in their close personal relationships are extremely telling about their type. I think the Si/Se divide is probably one of the most important - and it is why I never could see myself as an Se valuing type. My problem was, early on, I had never been around infantiles, so I never understood what it was like to be around people who actively needed me to give Si - even though I remember, from early on, having those urges. Now I understand what it is.

In one of my first relationships, whenever I want into Si mode, it was not rewarded, so I suppressed it. But now realizing there are people who really don't mind me just being totally sweet to them, and protective, now I understand and feel more comfortable in who I am, what I need, and what to look for. And realize that beta and gamma are just that way - not really valuing the "S" in the same way.

This is played out constantly in a marriage I watch, with an ISFp and ISTj.

[aka-kitsune]

This may be a fairly staightforward Si/Se + erotic roles aspect

But, betas, we know you like intensity and passion in relationships. But how do you feel about being very sweet to your significant other? What would "being sweet" to someone mean? Would you want someone to be sweet to you? Why or why not?

I interpret "sweet" as what I know as type things. A kind of chivalry. Like dropping me off, but waiting for me to get my car started before driving away. Offering me a taste or sip of whatever food and drink he's enjoying. Overall, it's a particular "extra" consideration that I feel is a special care and concern for me. Affection in action.

For myself, it perhaps means sharing an news item or movie recommendation that he might find interesting. Showing my genuine admiration and concern with engagement, keeping in touch without being presumptious. Giving another "space" (that can be VERY difficult for me, so it's definitely a consideration). I like being thoughtful of someone I feel affectionate about.

[misutii]

hmm I'll try providing an example of how we don't value Si or Te.

Si: I find that Si-valuing types value their own physical comfort too much. They like giving and receiving massages and relaxing. Personally I don't want to relax, I want to be captivated, the focus is less on how good or bad something feels but rather on its intensity. When people cook or clean for me I honestly don't appreciate it as much as I should. I'm fine with a bit of a mess, I'm fine with eating a microwave dinner. I'd prefer we spend our time going somewhere, doing something together, something that will be memorable rather than routine. Something that allows us to work together at a team to accomplish something that won't leave my memory so quick. If we have to suffer than so be it, we'll do it together and this leads to conflict well hell it would have happened sooner or later so why prolong the inevitable? Are we made for each other or not? Let's find out. If we are then we shouldn't need to compromise for each other. The relationship is either symbiotic or parasitic after all. Going to the movies? Let's see something worthwhile. I know what's worthwhile, no that romantic comedy is stupid don't embarrass yourself, no I refuse to waste my time seeing that PG-13 action movie because all those explosions won't compensate for its lack of originality. No I don't want to watch that cable TV-show again, I feel sorry for you that you like it, let's watch something on HBO instead. (lol those are some things that came to mind)

Te: I like witty bickering (i.e. generic insults that don't mean anything but are said for fun and exaggerated - "you asshole!"/"you bitch!"/etc.) but not criticisms. I don't like it when someone I trust talks shit about me behind my back (regardless of whether it's true or not I find it disrespectful). I expect us to act in each other's best interest. If I have a problem I expect them to take the initiative and help me with it, not talk about it, and expect myself to act the same with them. Also expect each other not necessarily to take what's said at face-value (sometime no means yes, sometimes yes means no, the body language/intonation means more than the words themselves)

that's all I can think of for now

[FDG]

Te: I like witty bickering (i.e. generic insults that don't mean anything but are said for fun and exaggerated - "you asshole!"/"you bitch!"/etc.) but not criticisms. I don't like it when someone I trust talks shit about me behind my back (regardless of whether it's true or not I find it disrespectful). I expect us to act in each other's best interest. If I have a problem I expect them to take the initiative and help me with it, not talk about it, and expect myself to act the same with them. Also expect each other not necessarily to take what's said at face-value (sometime no means yes, sometimes yes means no, the body language/intonation means more than the words themselves)

that's all I can think of for now

And why do you think Te types would bitch about you-to you if they were your friends-partners?

So it seems from a gamma perspective, really going into caregivermode makes them feel disgusted or weak or dependent, which is unappealing. It is not "strong". And from beta, it is just boring and dull, flat - no action or romance, no enticement.

What do you mean about disgusted? I think in a relationship there's time for everything, so when one of the two needs care, you give care. I don't see why there should be any regard about "strenght" when you're in a relationship in which parties trust each other, honestly.

[Blaze]

hmm I'll try providing an example of how we don't value Si or Te.

Si: I find that Si-valuing types value their own physical comfort too much. They like giving and receiving massages and relaxing. Personally I don't want to relax, I want to be captivated, the focus is less on how good or bad something feels but rather on its intensity. When people cook or clean for me I honestly don't appreciate it as much as I should. I'm fine with a bit of a mess, I'm fine with eating a microwave dinner. I'd prefer we spend our time going somewhere, doing something together, something that will be memorable rather than routine. Something that allows us to work together at a team to accomplish something that won't leave my memory so quick. If we have to suffer than so be it, we'll do it together and this leads to conflict well hell it would have happened sooner or later so why prolong the inevitable? Are we made for each other or not? Let's find out. If we are then we shouldn't need to compromise for each other. The relationship is either symbiotic or parasitic after all. Going to the movies? Let's see something worthwhile. I know what's worthwhile, no that romantic comedy is stupid don't embarrass yourself, no I refuse to waste my time seeing that PG-13 action movie because all those explosions won't compensate for its lack of originality. No I don't want to watch that cable TV-show again, I feel sorry for you that you like it, let's watch something on HBO instead. (lol those are some things that came to mind)

when i read stuff like this i think i'm more beta than alpha.

[zenbrat]

I'm being sweet if I'm gifting comfort/aesthetic items to enhance someone's well-being. This is symbolic. Things like: taking you out to a nice restaurant, candles from World Market, a massager from some funky bath shop, a rock fountain... etc. I am NOT the caretaker type at all, so I won't do these things as a matter of course.

This behavior was threatening to an ESTj (conflictor). From what I understand, ESTj's exhibit caretaking behavior by "doing" for their significants. Receiving isn't the most comfortable thing for them. He thought I was attempting to manipulate him emotionally. A couple of ISFj's I dated couldn't receive either - it was threatening, uncomfortable - they wanted to DO for me instead.

ESTp's, ISTj's and ENFj's have been extremely touched by these bouts of "sweetness". I think Beta's speak 'gifting' and Delta's speak 'acts of service' as their love languages.

[misutii]

And why do you think Te types would bitch about you-to you if they were your friends-partners?

umm I'm not completely sure... I was just listing things off the top of my head, looking for general misunderstandings that might go unspoken, rather than being specific, like the Si portion of my post showed how I value Ni over Si and Te portion showed how I'd value Fe over Te I suppose. It's difficult to get specific because I've never been in relationship with a Te-type but I have Te-type friends and have heard them discussing their relationships and it's always seemed a bit "off" for me (though of course I know they think the same of me because we've actually discussed it lol!).

also I'm not sure what I can say about Ne as I have a weird attraction to it, same with Fi. I'll have to think about these two and add something later. I think an ISTj or ESTp could do a better job with these two than me though.

[XoX]

But, betas, we know you like intensity and passion in relationships. But how do you feel about being very sweet to your significant other? What would "being sweet" to someone mean? Would you want someone to be sweet to you? Why or why not?

I don't want to be sweet. Basically because it just feels very much not me to be sweet. When I am being "sweet" I am lightly teasing someone. That is my way of being sweet. I don't think I can do better.

I am not as much bothered by someone else being sweet to me. I don't particularly enjoy it though because I am not sure how to respond and it makes me feel somewhat awkward. When someone is trying to be "sweet" to me I often accidentally respond with something that kind of ruins their mood but which I thought was funny. Like crack some joke or something when they are trying to be sweet in a "serious way" and getting too touchy feely. I tend to force some distance to people who try to get close to me by being sweet.

[redbaron]

I dunno. I like it when guys are sweet but quiet about it. Not over the top sweet or too seriously sweet. When my ESE husband tries to sweet talk me too much, I squirm and tell him to stop talking. I would rather have silence and have him show his feelings with actions or joke with me/tease me or something. Teasing is hugely sweet, yes. I get embarrassed when he talks too much (I mean lovey stuff). Good manners are fine, thoughtfulness is good. I LOVE it when he cooks for me, cleans up, etc. So I do really like Si. I find understated and subtle sweetness to be really cute and sexy. Examples: bringing me dessert from work (sometimes he works late and orders dessert with his dinner that he then saves for me) or a light kiss on the neck and then walking away. (!!) I'm not at all sure that I'd like a more aggressive approach although I've never experienced strong Se in a relationship so I'm probably not much help there. He is definitely usually the initiator with physical expressions of affection and I like that since I would hate to always be the one to have to initiate.

[Ms. Kensington]

I dunno. I like it when guys are sweet but quiet about it. Not over the top sweet or too seriously sweet. When my ESE husband tries to sweet talk me too much, I squirm and tell him to stop talking. I would rather have silence and have him show his feelings with actions or joke with me/tease me or something. Teasing is hugely sweet, yes. I get embarrassed when he talks too much (I mean lovey stuff). Good manners are fine, thoughtfulness is good. I LOVE it when he cooks for me, cleans up, etc. So I do really like Si. I find understated and subtle sweetness to be really cute and sexy. Examples: bringing me dessert from work (sometimes he works late and orders dessert with his dinner that he then saves for me) or a light kiss on the neck and then walking away. (!!) I'm not at all sure that I'd like a more aggressive approach although I've never experienced strong Se in a relationship so I'm probably not much help there. He is definitely usually the initiator with physical expressions of affection and I like that since I would hate to always be the one to have to initiate.

light kiss on the neck! hot. Mauling on the neck, also hot.

thanks redbaron and misutii, your posts are illuminating and ring true. Redbaron you sound like my INFp friend. her husband is most likely ESTp and he does joke and do things for her. I do think too much talking would embarrass her.

[xyz]

I think sweet in the terms we think of usually (like in movies and books) came come across as very boring. Just tossing my load into this convo.

[lefty]

infantile/caregiver are way too close and sustained of an interaction for me. to me it's too much like a parental relationships. i can't stand bathes either i prefer showers. i get suffocated very easily and if i go clothing shopping with a significant other i will probably flip out pretty quickly, because of parental associations. for me relationships should be about breaking away from parental bonds and into a new identity for yourself that belongs to you. i'm preoccupied with identity as nfs are known to be.

[lefty]

I think pretty much every couple does that to an extent. I wouldn't trace it back to functional preference you know.

maybe it can be traced back to functional preferances since all dual types contain the same functions just in different order.

[lefty]

But, betas, we know you like intensity and passion in relationships. But how do you feel about being very sweet to your significant other? What would "being sweet" to someone mean? Would you want someone to be sweet to you? Why or why not?

I don't want to be sweet. Basically because it just feels very much not me to be sweet. When I am being "sweet" I am lightly teasing someone. That is my way of being sweet. I don't think I can do better.

I am not as much bothered by someone else being sweet to me. I don't particularly enjoy it though because I am not sure how to respond and it makes me feel somewhat awkward. When someone is trying to be "sweet" to me I often accidentally respond with something that kind of ruins their mood but which I thought was funny. Like crack some joke or something when they are trying to be sweet in a "serious way" and getting too touchy feely. I tend to force some distance to people who try to get close to me by being sweet.

well, you know, i read an interesting article about how being very nice is actually a way of distancting ourselves from others where confrontation breeds bonding. so its kind of ironic.

[XoX]

But, betas, we know you like intensity and passion in relationships. But how do you feel about being very sweet to your significant other? What would "being sweet" to someone mean? Would you want someone to be sweet to you? Why or why not?

I don't want to be sweet. Basically because it just feels very much not me to be sweet. When I am being "sweet" I am lightly teasing someone. That is my way of being sweet. I don't think I can do better.

I am not as much bothered by someone else being sweet to me. I don't particularly enjoy it though because I am not sure how to respond and it makes me feel somewhat awkward. When someone is trying to be "sweet" to me I often accidentally respond with something that kind of ruins their mood but which I thought was funny. Like crack some joke or something when they are trying to be sweet in a "serious way" and getting too touchy feely. I tend to force some distance to people who try to get close to me by being sweet.

well, you know, i read an interesting article about how being very nice is actually a way of distancting ourselves from others where confrontation breeds bonding. so its kind of ironic.

I can actually subscribe to that in a way. I'm generally nicer to people I'm distant with than to people I know better.

[FDG]

But, betas, we know you like intensity and passion in relationships. But how do you feel about being very sweet to your significant other? What would "being sweet" to someone mean? Would you want someone to be sweet to you? Why or why not?

I don't want to be sweet. Basically because it just feels very much not me to be sweet. When I am being "sweet" I am lightly teasing someone. That is my way of being sweet. I don't think I can do better.

I am not as much bothered by someone else being sweet to me. I don't particularly enjoy it though because I am not sure how to respond and it makes me feel somewhat awkward. When someone is trying to be "sweet" to me I often accidentally respond with something that kind of ruins their mood but which I thought was funny. Like crack some joke or something when they are trying to be sweet in a "serious way" and getting too touchy feely. I tend to force some distance to people who try to get close to me by being sweet.

well, you know, i read an interesting article about how being very nice is actually a way of distancting ourselves from others where confrontation breeds bonding. so its kind of ironic.

I can actually subscribe to that in a way. I'm generally nicer to people I'm distant with than to people I know better.

I don't know. I think this issue is truly personal. I've had relationships where I was very confrontational with my SO and it just killed love. I am way nicer to people that are my close friends than to strangers.

[sigma]

But, betas, we know you like intensity and passion in relationships. But how do you feel about being very sweet to your significant other? What would "being sweet" to someone mean? Would you want someone to be sweet to you? Why or why not?

I was recently in an intimate encounter with an ISTj girl I know... and she blurted out some highly redundant physical interaction recommendations... I thought that was sooo sweet... I like sweet things like that... or when they ask for a massage... again... sweet... because I would pay to give them one.

Sweet, in my view, is when you are being asked nicely to perform something you are dieing to perform...

[Rubicon]