Romancing Styles / Erotic Attitudes

[Expat]

This is perhaps a delicate subject, but I was wondering if anyone has considered whether they agree with Gulenko's descriptions of 4 groups of sexual behavior, to be found here or with more detail in socionics.org:

Careful: ESTj, ISTp, ESFj, ISFp
Aggressor: ESTp, ISTj, ESFp, ISFj
Victim: ENTj, INTp, ENFj, INFp
Infantile: ENTp, INTj, ENFp, INFj

I was reminded of this when an ESFj female friend of mine said that her relationship with an ENFp guy (her beneficiary) had reached a dead-end and he wanted to split but that the sex was great (the ENFp belonging to the same group as her dual, the INTj).

I won't get into any intimate details but I have to say that from my limited observations those descriptions are amazingly accurate.

Can anyone else say whether their observations also confirm those descriptions?

[Cone]

Those attitudes also extend out to non-sexual behaviors. For example, the Victim types are marked by passive, reactive behaviors, all characteristic of the Ni function. Whereas Aggressors are marked by Se, basically aggressive, active behaviors. Infantile and Careful types are somewhere in the middle of this dichotomy, but they also have their own (whatever that is.)

[alex]

More writings on this topic would be great. However, I remember PTL said something about there being little evidence for correlation in studies.

[Jimbean]

Hi I'm back, . it has been a while because I don't have a computer anymore.

Now about the question, how accurate do I think the erotic attitudes are? I would say yes and no. Of course I disagree with it personally, I am only half ENTp . However it seems to work with most people that I have met, especially extreme types.

[FDG]

Sure as hell I'm a victim

[Artemis]

Prepare to be victimized!

[Waddlesworth]

I'm very afraid of being hurt. So much that I have extreme difficulties in making the first move because I'm not sure if I REALLY am reading the person's intentions or not. I think this lets girls think that they can get away with more around me and not expect anything and then "BAM!" just when i give it a shot, my worst fears come true "EW, GET OFF OF ME YOU FREAK!" it never happened but i'm worried it will. but then again, why would she be so close if she thought i was a freak... alright, next time she does the "lay next to" baby talk im goin' in for the kill! well, the love. you get the idea.

but once the wheels are in motion i'm very sexually demanding and every morning turns into a sex fest for me. I can get very annoying I'm sure.

"What, you don't want to love me? you don't want to express in the flesh your bodily love for me? why? am I ugly? you find me unnattractive? Obviously i'm not turning you on so it must be true. Well, i guess not, but still... well... not even a handjob? if you loved me you'd give me a handjob... THEN I'd shutup. if you don't give me a handjob you must think I'm gross because you will only gain by giving me one. I'll stop complaining, feel happy, AND be my normal self again. isn't that what you want? I promise I'll be quick. Maybe it'll even turn you on a little, then i promise i'll return the favor."


I've learned my lesson and probably wont do that anymore.

[Catholic Schoolboy]

Good God guys it's just sex. Stop it with the: .

No, it was not an oops you want to have sex. You know that you do, and you know that you like it.


Anyway. I don't like that thing and I don't agree with it.
(Okay, the fact that I don't agree could be because of the extra Se, perhaps?)

[Expat]

Those attitudes also extend out to non-sexual behaviors. For example, the Victim types are marked by passive, reactive behaviors, all characteristic of the Ni function.

That's what I find odd, I don't think it's typical of myself - or of ENTjs - to be passive in most situations; but if I'm involved emotionally I do behave like a member of the Victim group since I idealize the woman. Besides, those group descriptions have details that go beyond simple aggressivennes vs passivity etc.

[Expat]

Anyway. I don't like that thing and I don't agree with it.

You don't like being a member of the Victim quadra?

[Jimbean]

Is there anyone who does not correlate with the "erotic attitudes" theory?

Actually, now that I think about it, I realize that I am probably more infantile than aggressive (whatever I am, I am definitely not careful ). I have similar problem as WW, probably like most ENTps as well, only of course with variations.

@ Cone, what is that *thing* in your avatar?

[discojoe]

I am infantile sexually, in that I express a childlike sort of playful innocence in romantic situations. In bed however, I am a bit more professional, I think.

[Artemis]

Besides loving to play the victim, I am extremely selfish.

[FDG]

Those attitudes also extend out to non-sexual behaviors. For example, the Victim types are marked by passive, reactive behaviors, all characteristic of the Ni function.

That's what I find odd, I don't think it's typical of myself - or of ENTjs - to be passive in most situations; but if I'm involved emotionally I do behave like a member of the Victim group since I idealize the woman. Besides, those group descriptions have details that go beyond simple aggressivennes vs passivity etc.

Exactly! I'm quite ass-holish in dealing with people (Or, at least, direct and independent), but a puppy with S.O.

[XoX]

I wonder if these "attitudes" are any good and if they are could they be applied to all human interaction not just love or erotic related.
Below are the classification and the types belonging to each group.

See: http://www.the16types.info/groups.php?groupsid=5

Careful
- ESTj
- ISTp
- ESFj
- ISFp

Aggressor
- ESTp
- ISTj
- ESFp
- ISFj

Victim
- ENTj
- INTp
- ENFj
- INFp

Infantile
- ENTp
- INTj
- ENFp
- INFj

My short and uninformed opinion on each class. This is not a serious take just to get the discussion started.

Careful
- See other people in a caring but maybe arrogant way as if
they are somekind of "parent figure" and everyone else
needs their attention and help
- Interact as if they they are in control but not in aggressive way. This
type always acts in a caring way and expect the partner to accept
this care without rebellion
- Has an openly "patronizing" subtype and a subtype that applies
"care" indirectly
- Hates signs of aggression in themself
- Has "I know what is best for you" attitude

Aggressor
- Sometimes is openly arrogant and aggressive and expects complete
mental submittal from others
- Sometimes has a very victim like look and uses indirect means to
control the partner. In the "heart" is as aggressive and control
oriented as the openly aggressive version. Can turn openly
aggressive if the "victim" refuses to submit to indirect
control.
- Hates signs of weakness in themself
- Has "I am in control" attitude

Victim
- Can project either a submissive or arrogant view of themselves
- The openly submissive version never questions the partners
control but expects the partner to "show the way" in all aspects
of the relationship or interaction
- The arrogant version looks aggressive and always challenges people
but the true meaning of this behaviour is to find an aggressor who
is stronger than the victim themself. This type can never be "tamed"
but the partner has to "apply force" at all times to keep the
arrogant victim under control
- Hates signs of weakness in others
- Has "I want you to control me (if you can)" attitude

Infantile
- Can be openly childlike/dreamer/detached or more formal looking with an "inner child"
- Has lots of needs and can be selfish (like a child) and expects
the partner to totally adapt to this behaviour
- Can be openly needy for loving and care
- On the other hand can be openly rebellious against care and
need a lot of "right kind of" attention
- Doesn't want the partner to directly control but instead set loose
"boundaries" and safe guards within which it is safe to play and have fun
- Hates signs of aggression or indifferency in others
- Has "I want you to be my friend and guardian angel" attitude

Good compatibility
Careful - Infantile
Aggressor - Victim
-> natural pairs

Some compatibility
Careful - Victim
-> somewhat satisfying for careful, not truly satisfying for victim

Bad compatibility
Careful - Aggressor
-> frustrating for the careful, insulting for the aggressor
Aggressor - Infantile
-> somewhat satisfying for the aggressor, scary for the infantile
Victim - Infantile
-> totally unsatisfying for each
All identical pairs
-> mixed success but bad in any case

So are there any well informed opinions out there? And do you feel these attitudes don't match yourself at all? I can see myself as having a (sometimes openly) careful attitude. I could see myself "role playing" all the other attitudes except infantile. Maybe even that.

[UDP]

fair enough.....

[Joy]

what a bunch of bullshit

[Expat]

I think Gulenko is on to something, but your interpretations here of the groups are largely wrong IMO.

[Joy]

I don't mind talking about sex at all. It's all the emotional stuff that I dislike discussing with those who have no business knowing what's on my mind.

[Creepy-]

As far as Victims/Aggressors go, I can see how it works out. I don't really understand how the Careful/Infantile relationships work, possibly because I'm not either of them.

Normally I would be a Victim (maizemedley described it very well ). I appreciate (tactfully) aggressive people as friends/lovers/anything really. It takes the pressure off, in a way.

I do expect people to be aggressive to an extent, but if I can't get it (or if their aggression isn't "appropriate" for my tastes"), then I have no real problems being aggressive myself.

I can't imagine myself in a Careful role. I really don't think I could pull it off, although at times I can seem to take the Infantile role.

[FDG]

I don't mind talking about sex at all. It's all the emotional stuff that I dislike discussing with those who have no business knowing what's on my mind.

Interesting how you flood the forum with some relationship shit, and then comlain about people taking about your relationships. Notice how the second line of your signature contains a statement that is evidently conflicting with what you have expressed here.

Yes, no one can know what's on your mind - only ENTps read minds.

And moreover, there would still be something that you're not saying, I'm sure.

[diamond]

The erotic attitudes seem like they're from a porn flick. Cheesy.

[mimisor]

I wonder if these "attitudes" are any good and if they are could they be applied to all human interaction not just love or erotic related.

Yes it does apply. It's actually one of the things I look about when I type people. I noticed the related attitudes are more evident with the Careful/ Infantile types. Like me, for example, I am infantile all the time, not only in intimacy.

Especially the Victim types are more difficult to spot, because they don't act out like victims in public. For example ENTjs you wouldn't suspect them to be a Victim when they are so opinionated and tough as a normal behaviour. You would be tempted to think them as Agressors. And INFps I usually think of them as Careful with other people, when they are actually Victim.

If we take a look at the Agressors group, ESTps are most evident Agressors in public as well, while ISFjs and ESFps you wouldn't normally think of them as Agressors

I do expect people to be aggressive to an extent, but if I can't get it (or if their aggression isn't "appropriate" for my tastes"), then I have no real problems being aggressive myself.

ishy, yes I see what you're saying. I think it's as your suggestive function that you like to take the Agressive role when there's nobody around to assume it. Myself I am inclined to assume the Careful role because of as suggestive but only if it's strictly necessary and there's nobody else.

I can't imagine myself in a Careful role. I really don't think I could pull it off

hmm... I always picture INFps as Careful socially. I think it's because of your as a secondary function that you are not that confident about it.

[ScarlettLux]

You know what, this does make sense, at least for me.

I am 100% a Victim. The person above who described it was, again, quite accurate. It's kinda weird, but I want to be dominated.. controlled..

[Creepy-]

I do expect people to be aggressive to an extent, but if I can't get it (or if their aggression isn't "appropriate" for my tastes"), then I have no real problems being aggressive myself.

ishy, yes I see what you're saying. I think it's as your suggestive function that you like to take the Agressive role when there's nobody around to assume it. Myself I am inclined to assume the Careful role because of as suggestive but only if it's strictly necessary and there's nobody else.

Yeah, I don't generally like being in an Aggressor but it can be done.

I can't imagine myself in a Careful role. I really don't think I could pull it off

hmm... I always picture INFps as Careful socially. I think it's because of your as a secondary function that you are not that confident about it.

You could be right. Maybe I could do it if I was doing a million other things at once because I'm sure if I involved any kind of consciousness I'd freak out and have no idea what to do/how to act.

But isn't it the that makes one a Careful type?

[mimisor]

But isn't it the that makes one a Careful type?

Ah yes you're right, just checked, Si is Careful

ISFp and ISTp have Si as dominant function, ESFj and ESTJ as secondary function

[Creepy-]

I don't know if this is the "official" reasoning, but all the groups have a common dominant perceiving function.

Victim

Infantile

Careful

Aggressor

[WVBRY]

Your interpretations are, from my own experience, totally correct. As I was reading your description of each quadra, I got a sense that I had I bunch of women Ive known from different types flash before my eyes. Like your description of the infantile attitude. That totally describes this INFJ girl who Ive had a horrible relationship with.

And this:

aggressor:
- Sometimes has a very victim like look and uses indirect means to
control the partner. In the "heart" is as aggressive and control
oriented as the openly aggressive version. Can turn openly
aggressive if the "victim" refuses to submit to indirect
control.

That sounds like just about every woman I run into, and I can intuitively feel this.

[Creepy-]

Maizemedley, you masochist you.

you beta believe it!

*giggle*

[UDP]

Maizemedley, you masochist you.

you beta believe it!

*giggle*

Where's that damn 'twisted' gif that I used to have........

oh well

:evilgrin:

[Dmitri Lytov]

I know Victor Gulenko personally. He is a smart person with very broad interests. However, he tends to terminological reductionism: he always attempts to explain complicated things in terms of few simple words. The same is with the concept of love types. The author of the topic DID NOT DISTORT Gulenko's views: he said exactly what was written in Gulenko's article.

[Jimbean]

bump

lets talk about this some more

[XoX]

bump
lets talk about this some more

Ok...I'm learning to be a victim now

[Jimbean]

I really don't think that this strictly goes along with socionic types.

I am ENTp aggressive. Thats why I posted the thread "Strong Role Function?," I think socionic type varies with person to person. Like I may not be as much of an ENTp as other ENTp's.

[Joy]

Careful and Aggressor both fit me.

[Phaedrus]

I can see that it fits me and some ENTps and ENFps that I know. The other types I am unsure of.

[Topaz]

I periodically have burst of aggression but otherwise this fits me too. Now if I can just find that careful girl to rock me to sleep. :wink:

[Joy]

The more I think about it, the more I see what I felt to be aggressor attitude to be more of a careful attitude. I don't like this idea.

[XoX]

The more I think about it, the more I see what I felt to be aggressor attitude to be more of a careful attitude. I don't like this idea.

Hmm..why not liking it?

[WVBRY]

I wonder if people can "switch".