Romancing styles - female "aggressors"

[Cuddly McFluffles]

It would surprise me if this hasn't been covered already. If it has, please point me to the thread.

Anyway, Wikisocion says that rather than being bossy, a female Aggressor expects loyalty from her partner. So in general, what's a female Aggressor like, and how does she differ from the male Aggressor? Also, what is the Victim male/Aggressor female dynamic like?

[Ezra]

In terms of female Beta Aggressors, we're a bit lacking in Beta ST females. ESTP never really posts, and Herzy obviously stopped posting a while ago. But I can imagine that with the SLE-IEI duality it's based on a kind of dominance of the female in any sexual encounters, and a sexually appealing yet highly mysterious IEI male. When it comes to LSI-EIE duality, I always imagine a dominatrix. The EIE woos the LSI, who - when they find their way to the bedroom - becomes an animal.

Expat likes to put this image across of the "faithful knight in armour" for a Gamma Victim who essentially is subservient to his Gamma Aggressor "queen". They're not like sex slaves or anything, but rather he'll basically defend the Aggressor without mollycoddling her (because she clearly doesn't need it). It's a bit like some of the knights of old Europe protecting a stereotypical ESI princess or queen. However, this metaphor seems to extend only to LIE-ESI duality, and I'd be rather interested in how the SEE-ILI Aggressor/Victim dynamic works out in a relationship.

[idolatrie]

As a newly minted Beta ST, I'll see what I can contribute.

When it comes to LSI-EIE duality, I always imagine a dominatrix. The EIE woos the LSI, who - when they find their way to the bedroom - becomes an animal.

Hmm...possibly. I see the emotional and sexual elements of a relationship as being different elements. I am not comfortable taking the lead emotionally, but I have no such reservations sexually. In fact, I will pretty much automatically start taking control. But I'm not looking for someone who will just lie back and think of England, or whatever. I want someone to meet that challenge, because that pushes me to further heights and when they do finally yield (which they will, of course), it's all the sweeter (greater the triumph and prize with the harder the battle).

I'm not sure about becoming an 'animal'. I'm possibly being pedantic with your word choice there, and I don't really have a problem with that descriptor. But I also think there's a greater degree of control being exercised. I remember reading in one of the LSI descriptions that we have a great desire to appear completely competant in sexual matters, but there's also an element of detachment. And that is utterly true for me. I have a lot of theoretical knowledge to do with sex, and I find myself consciously accessing that when I'm with someone. I feel like I can't stop myself from observing and processing all the reactions of my partner, to work out what works best, what's going to bring him undone. I know what I'm doing all the time - aware of how I'm positioning my legs, of what affect my hands are having. Of how I can take control of a kiss any moment, whether that is being the one doing everything, or allowing him what degree of access at that point. I can't 'lose' myself in the sensations completely. But then again, I don't really think I can hold my experiences up as any kind of standard as they are rather far from ideal.

But I wouldn't be aggressive in the sense of going up to a guy and saying 'hey, wanna fuck?' That's just...no. I'm not prudish in the sense that I'm comfortable talking about sexual matters (given the right company, though I'm pretty easy about that really). But being what I see as vulgar is another matter entirely.

I'm also aware that others perceive my behaviour differently from the way I do. I constantly find myself going 'I never see it coming'. There's been many occasions when I find myself surprised and thinking 'why are we kissing now?', but once it starts it's like a switch gets flicked and something kicks in that makes me need to take control of the (physical) situation.

Loyalty is important. Loyalty is incredibly important. I think (and I'm only speculating here) I would have a fairly high tolerance for 'games' being played in this regard, but when it comes down to it, I'm pretty possessive. But that's something that should go both ways. Equality is hugely important too.

I don't think I've ever been involved with a victim male, and definitely not with an EIE in particular. My cursory typing of my exes has most of them as SEEs, and a LII. So I'd definitely like to hear that perspective on this topic too.

[Nexus]

It would surprise me if this hasn't been covered already. If it has, please point me to the thread.

Anyway, Wikisocion says that rather than being bossy, a female Aggressor expects loyalty from her partner. So in general, what's a female Aggressor like, and how does she differ from the male Aggressor? Also, what is the Victim male/Aggressor female dynamic like?

The female aggressor likes to chain her victim to a hut, drug them, and then sexually molest them using tazers, whips, and other instruments of torture. I know from personal experience.

[Gilly]

Alright, here's my take on Male Victim/Female Aggressor from the point of a male.

I am a great conversationalist, flirt, teaser, etc etc, but when it comes to actually expressing overt interest and taking an interaction beyond flirtation and such, I tend to feel a bit out of my league. I think I need a girl who is not shy about expressing her actual interest in me in order to begin a relationship, or even have a one night stand. I'm great at picking up signals as to whether or not someone is attracted to me, but unless there is an overt display of interest by the girl, it always feels like there's this "bubble" in the ongoing interaction that I am typically hesitant to break. I love eye fucking, teasing, making suggestive comments, etc, but I just have a strange block about making my intentions known until I am sure that my interest is fully reciprocated.

As for sex, I love taking turns between being dominant and submissive. I like the feeling of having a degree of power over a girl in sex, but I don't usually have the energy to always play that role without some kind of impetus. It makes it more fun for me if the girl tries to get in control; it gives me motivation to stay engaged; I'm not going to space out during sex, but my level of interest definitely goes down if it's just fucking with no action involved, and yeah, my mind will wander if the girl is not exciting to me. Half of sexual pleasure for me is mental, totally attached to whether or not I am fully engaged in the situation. If a girl just lays there, or is openly submissive to me, it's boring and pointless; if she tries to take control, then it adds another level of intensity to the experience; it becomes more than "just sex."

[Ezra]

If a girl just lays there, or is openly submissive to me, it's boring and pointless; if she tries to take control, then it adds another level of intensity to the experience; it becomes more than "just sex."

Betabetabetabetabeta

I've had a few (I wouldn't say embarassing, because they weren't) situations where I just wasn't turned on enough to fuck. The reason being, these girls were entirely passive, instead of active. Mental stimulation is incredibly important in any kind sexual encounters, and if they're turned on, that turns you on, and so if there is some intensity; some passion; that is a great precursor for sex. The impulse needs to be there, or the body will not follow. It's the way of nature .

[Gilly]

Indeed. If Carmen Elektra was a dead fish, I probably couldn't get off in her.

[idolatrie]

Aargh, lost this post once already, so this is getting rewritten in brief, sans anecdotes.


I think the difference between Beta and Gamma sexuality is that for the STs, it's something like 'I will have sex with you now', and for the SFs, it's more 'I will make you want to have sex with me now'.

I think Beta is far more concerned with mindgames, whereas Gamma focuses on the physicality. So for me, my biggest disappointment has been the lack of mental engagement that has allowed me to detach from the situation and start thinking too much. I think what I need would be being kept on my toes constantly, so I'm always having to react and respond to something unexpected. Fighting for control would be one way of ensuring that, I think.

Ezra, you wrote about not being turned on enough to fuck. It is either better/worse for girls, because you really don't need to be turned on in order to 'respond'. And yes, I've faked my way out of situations just to get it over with (since I had no idea what he thought he was doing, and I don't think he knew either). The right response to dirty talk is not a compliment. Seriously.

I think with the SFs, the aggressor/victim dynamic is rooted in physical desirability. With my SEE exes, I think for them their aggressor 'triumph' was getting me to physically want them - once they had achieved that, letting me take control of what we did was fine with them. This was a problem for me since the lack of ongoing, well, mindgames and battle for control meant I lost interest and got bored very quickly.

I've seen a SEE friend of mine in action. She definitely focuses on her physical allure. She wants to seduce as many men as she can in order to prove her desirability. She doesn't need to actually sleep with them to prove that - just make them want her and demonstrate that they do.

[FDG]

Aargh, lost this post once already, so this is getting rewritten in brief, sans anecdotes.


I think the difference between Beta and Gamma sexuality is that for the STs, it's something like 'I will have sex with you now', and for the SFs, it's more 'I will make you want to have sex with me now'.

I think Beta is far more concerned with mindgames, whereas Gamma focuses on the physicality. So for me, my biggest disappointment has been the lack of mental engagement that has allowed me to detach from the situation and start thinking too much. I think what I need would be being kept on my toes constantly, so I'm always having to react and respond to something unexpected. Fighting for control would be one way of ensuring that, I think.

Ezra, you wrote about not being turned on enough to fuck. It is either better/worse for girls, because you really don't need to be turned on in order to 'respond'. And yes, I've faked my way out of situations just to get it over with (since I had no idea what he thought he was doing, and I don't think he knew either). The right response to dirty talk is not a compliment. Seriously.

I think with the SFs, the aggressor/victim dynamic is rooted in physical desirability. With my SEE exes, I think for them their aggressor 'triumph' was getting me to physically want them - once they had achieved that, letting me take control of what we did was fine with them. This was a problem for me since the lack of ongoing, well, mindgames and battle for control meant I lost interest and got bored very quickly.

I've seen a SEE friend of mine in action. She definitely focuses on her physical allure. She wants to seduce as many men as she can in order to prove her desirability. She doesn't need to actually sleep with them to prove that - just make them want her and demonstrate that they do.

I think that's a great observation on the differences, really.

[strrrng]

Female aggressors are awesome. My most significant past relationship was with an ESTp, and in retrospect, it was awesome to see how she brought me out, so to speak, and sort of pushed my boundaries. Not that I'm uncomfortable applying pressure lol, but it always feels more natural when I'm reacting to the offense or w/e. Because I can handle it, and just feel like I'm expending too much energy when I take that role. Of course, every now and then it works fine; balance is necessary. But on the whole, just give me an ESTp so I can have a good beating

[Ezra]

Ezra, you wrote about not being turned on enough to fuck. It is either better/worse for girls, because you really don't need to be turned on in order to 'respond'.

For females, it's far easier to feign enjoyment of sex (most of you don't even need to "perform" as such (I realise this is really, really general). For me, if the drive is lacking, my potency is as well.

[Cuddly McFluffles]

The female aggressor likes to chain her victim to a hut, drug them, and then sexually molest them using tazers, whips, and other instruments of torture. I know from personal experience.

O.O There was no molestation involved! I think somebody imbibed too much Delta juice.

[idolatrie]

For females, it's far easier to feign enjoyment of sex (most of you don't even need to "perform" as such (I realise this is really, really general). For me, if the drive is lacking, my potency is as well.

You're not talking about aggressors when you say girls don't need to 'perform', lol. I probably didn't explain this adequately before, but when I specifically meant was that I've been in sexual situations where I was not turned on at all. Not through any objective fault of the guy, but because what we were doing just wasn't exciting me very much. I tried to up the ante, but that didn't really work (see: dirty talk/compliment, wtf?). So I just made sure he got off, then left ASAP. I told him I had gotten off, he was somewhat sceptical, but I didn't care by that point and just wanted to leave.

I guess I was just getting at the point that it is far easier for girls to hide the fact they aren't enjoying it. It's a matter of what you do with that lack of 'potency' - do you fake it and make sure your partner gets off, or do you just call the whole thing off because you can't get off?

Huh, reading back on that, I don't think I'm actually disagreeing with you actually. Bah, posting anyway.

[Khamelion]

I am Queen. Worship me and my body, then you shall be rewarded.



my beta roommate (eie) accuses me of going after guys just to prove that i can...in a way i am doing that...but thats not WHY im doing it. im doing it because it's fun. challenging. good times. and i want to get laid. im not really trying to prove that im more attractive, which is what girls often feel threatened by. i dont even consider myself that attractive to most guys because of my height and stature...so im usually surprised when my hunt works out.

if i get drunk, and you're playing hard to get, then its all over for you my friend. i'll get vicious.

the guys who throw themselves at me, or make it too easy im not interested in. except george. bwahahahahaaaaaa

[unefille]

my beta roommate (eie) accuses me of going after guys just to prove that i can...in a way i am doing that...but thats not WHY im doing it. im doing it because it's fun. challenging. good times. and i want to get laid. im not really trying to prove that im more attractive, which is what girls often feel threatened by. i dont even consider myself that attractive to most guys because of my height and stature...so im usually surprised when my hunt works out.

The accusation from the EIE is probably partly out of a weird desire that they could do the same thing as well. I can be an outrageous flirt and my SEE friend ALWAYS comments on that, but I'm all teasing and she's actually a seducer. I'd feel ridiculous doing half the things she does without even consciously thinking about it - dipping her shoulders to show off her breasts, looking at boys through her lashes, pouting and leaning toward them...I've tried and I just collapsed in hopeless laughter at myself halfway through it.

Watching her in action is very amusing. She doesn't have any desire to necessarily get it to go anywhere - everyone is fair game as well. Actually, that can be annoying. Even with guys who are with you, she'll sort of do the same routine. She doesn't plan to steal them or anything, it's her just who she is: do you want me? Ok! Next. She even gets territorial when we're just talking with a male friend and will sort of jut a shoulder out, blocking me with her body, and making really steadfast, intense eye contact. I get annoyed, but I'm sure I play my own type of games as well, just less...overtly sexual.

I don't want to be like her, but I just think: OMG, how much more straightforward would life be IF I WERE. [grass, greener, other side.]

[Khamelion]

The accusation from the EIE is partly out of a weird desire that they could do the same thing as well. I can be an outrageous flirt and my SEE friend ALWAYS comments on that, but I'm all teasing and she's actually a seducer. I'd feel ridiculous doing half the things she does without even consciously thinking about it - dipping her shoulders to show off her breasts, looking at boys through her lashes, pouting and leaning toward them...I've tried and I just collapsed in hopeless laughter at myself halfway through it.

Watching her in action is very amusing. She doesn't have any desire to necessarily get it to go anywhere - everyone is fair game as well. Actually, that can be annoying. Even with guys who are with you, she'll sort of do the same routine. She doesn't plan to steal them or anything, it's her just who she is: do you want me? Ok! Next. She even gets territorial when we're just talking with a male friend and will sort of jut a shoulder out, blocking me with her body, and making really steadfast, intense eye contact. I get annoyed, but I'm sure I play my own type of games as well, just less...overtly sexual.

Interesting...I don't really do those things like batting eye lashes or expose the breasts. She's randomly confided to me that I'm intimidating to her. But, ever since she's found her LSI boyfriend they are always just ripping into me about who I sleep with. It's done humorously most of the time, but sometimes its just kind of fucked up. I can't tell her anything without her telling him, and he makes fun of me more than she will...and more harshly. It doesn't really hurt my feelings...but I'm left just feeling kind of annoyed and betrayed. HAH, usually we'd all end up drinking and it would get really bad....but he and I would just go out front and have it out throwing punches at each other. (not at our faces just in the arms and stuff) His Se was realllllly fun to play with....we had power games going all the time and he'd use his serious mean face to try and get me to back down. This barely worked, except for one time when I thought he really was pissed at me for something. And he clearly wasn't afraid to hurt me so...I kinda backed off.


I actually don't really FLIRT like most people do, unless I've had a few drinks. Then I get REALLLLLY giggly and loud. But usually, I attract my prey by acting like I don't want to be wherever I am (sometimes I really don't want to be there) and then they try and amuse me. Then I'll act like I think they are nothing, which weeds out the ones who are not worthy. For some reason a lot of guys like this. They think its funny when I act a little grumpy and slightly narcissistic, like its a challenge to amuse me to get me in a fair mood. If they are trying to make me HAPPY I am prone to not liking them that much...for this points to Fe-ish atmosphere controllers! ESTp's are alright though, they usually focus on making me laugh which is alright. There is a difference between laughing at things and being "happy".


I do things like eye flirting. Which is just random glances, met by other eyes...raised eye brows and making faces and laughing...the more prolonged this is the more rewarding it can be.

Remind me to never EVER flirt around ESE's again. They HATE it. They are uber threatened it seems....

I'm not even really a "slut". I think I'm like any other girl, pursuing what she wants. I don't prefer hunting. I'd much rather have a steady "knight in shining armor" or "royal advisor"...whatever the fuck. I've always had a flirty personality though, without trying. Girls didn't like me in high school, because whenever I'd talk to their boyfriends they thought I was stealing them. I just merely preferred male company over female....

[unefille]

But, ever since she's found her LSI boyfriend they are always just ripping into me about who I sleep with. It's done humorously most of the time, but sometimes its just kind of fucked up. I can't tell her anything without her telling him, and he makes fun of me more than she will...and more harshly. It doesn't really hurt my feelings...but I'm left just feeling kind of annoyed and betrayed. HAH, usually we'd all end up drinking and it would get really bad....but he and I would just go out front and have it out throwing punches at each other. (not at our faces just in the arms and stuff) His Se was realllllly fun to play with....we had power games going all the time and he'd use his serious mean face to try and get me to back down. This barely worked, except for one time when I thought he really was pissed at me for something. And he clearly wasn't afraid to hurt me so...I kinda backed off.

Whoa, that's kind of really not cool. I can imagine that I'd tell my dual everything - I mean, I already do. And I can imagine that an LSI would judge more harshly. idolatrie definitely has a more disapproving/opinionated take on what my SEE does (but for different reasons - even maybe slightly competitive reasons?). But the whole punching girls and ripping into you to your face thing is pretty intolerable. It sounds like your roommate is a bit insecure in herself and using her boyfriend's reactions as a source of validation, frankly. Which, sadly, is not behaviour alien to EIEs.

My SEE tells me about the people she sleeps with and sometimes says 'oh I'm such a slut' and she completely isn't. Slut is such a misogynistic term anyway. Sometimes those conversations make me uncomfortable, but I realise that a lot of the issues lie with me as much as they do with her. If I was half as comfortable with expressing my sexuality, I'd be incredibly thankful, but it's not her fault that I'm not.

I think female aggressors can be dealt very unfairly by social judgement and a lot of other women use gender stereotypes and misogynistic attitudes to judge them by. idolatrie's behaviour has never phased me and I frankly don't see anything wrong or inappropriate with what she does, but at the same, there is such a social stigma attached to it that even people I consider 'enlightened' buy into. I've gotten into so many arguments with people who say things like 'oh, she's so sexually aggressive, what a slut' like they're making an insightful statement - 'why would you let your boyfriend near her?' or 'she's easy' or 'i'd never date a girl like that'. It makes me want to punch them. Probably comes from both my best friends being aggressors, lol.

[idolatrie]

Whoa, that's kind of really not cool. I can imagine that I'd tell my dual everything - I mean, I already do. And I can imagine that an LSI would judge more harshly. idolatrie definitely has a more disapproving/opinionated take on what my SEE does (but for different reasons - even maybe slightly competitive reasons?).

I don't even know where to start responding to all this. But first off, the kind of relationship described between Khamelion and the LSI sounds scary. I don't think my relationship with the SEE unefille is talking about would ever get to that stage - but then, I've know her since we were 12, so *shrugs* we've already weathered the ups and downs of our relationship and we'll never be that close again. Yet what unefille described of my attitude towards her is true. I have gotten competitive with her, lol. It was very minor, but we can provoke each other fairly easily. And it didn't do any damage to our relationship at all - didn't change a thing. I am more disapproving and opinionated towards her. She can irritate me very easily, and it is very easy for me to express my annoyance towards her, in a way which probably hurts her to some degree. I regret that I do that, but I still keep doing it.

With particular regards to her sexual habits, I think she does things which she shouldn't. I think she puts herself into relationships or situations where she is/can be abused. I *worry* about her in those relationships, and I think she's sacrificing her health because of her attitude towards many things, including men and men who have damaged her. Sometimes I tell her this, sometimes I just tell unefille, and leave it to her to digest and incorporate if she thinks fit.

But I do remember one occasion when a mutual friend said some digusting things about the SEE and her sexual habits. It pissed me off so much, because I saw him as having no right whatsoever to judge her that way, and to draw the conclusions which he did. I judge her behaviour, sure, in terms of what I think is healthy and 'rational' (not in the socionics sense). But I wouldn't question her ability to be loyal because she's sexually aggressive. I wouldn't quesiton her worth as a person because of it.

I disagree with her sexual philosophy (which is that it is a form of emancipation), but at the same time, I do understand it.

I have another SEE friend who tells me about her sexual exploits in detail. Sometimes I envy what I see as the honesty and simplicity of her attitude towards sex and relationships. I get mired in tangled webs of god knows what is going on, compared to the way she enjoys her body and her life. She has her complications too, but that doesn't stop her from pursuing what she wants right now.

I think female aggressors can be dealt very unfairly by social judgement and a lot of other women use gender stereotypes and misogynistic attitudes to judge them by. idolatrie's behaviour has never phased me and I frankly don't see anything wrong or inappropriate with what she does, but at the same, there is such a social stigma attached to it that even people I consider 'enlightened' buy into. I've gotten into so many arguments with people who say things like 'oh, she's so sexually aggressive, what a slut' like they're making an insightful statement - 'why would you let your boyfriend near her?' or 'she's easy' or 'i'd never date a girl like that'. It makes me want to punch them. Probably comes from both my best friends being aggressors, lol.

And finding out that certain people said that hurt me incredibly. A lot of that is directly because of who said it, and my very unique history with her. I felt utterly betrayed that she would see me that way. More generally, I dislike that attitude, whether it is directed at me or others. Often I can just roll my eyes and handwave it away, but it does hurt to some degree. It is suggesting something that I am not. Whether that is a slut or a homewrecker. And the fact they could think that shows they have spectacularly misunderstood me and my motives. But the fact that they *could* think that makes me quesiton myself and whether I come across that way.

[Khamelion]

What you say about how you actually view the SEE's behavior is what my roommate says of her boyfriend. That he just doesn't agree with what I do, or see's danger in it or something. The thing is...I don't ever really get that hurt...so I don't really like being warned in the condescending way he warns me. They put themselves up on a pedestal of some sort that I don't recognize as a pedestal. So...I don't let it bother me and I let them being each others King and Queen of Right and Wrong (or whatever dynamic you want to apply to it )


I would say that it's scary, these little fights are usually provoked mutually...its like letting out our aggression on each other. I often imagine us in this sort of exaggerated growling at each other state. It's pretty much what it feels like. Neither of us gets seriously hurt...and I kind of love it. I really do love rough-housing and what not, and feel lucky when I find a boy/guy who is willing to give me a challenge rather than say, "Wahhhh I dont hit girls its wroonnngg."

I think I annoy him really easily, but I also make him laugh. He easily voices his annoyance with me too, like you said you do.

One time, during a drunken party moment, he openly mocked me for some relation I had with his cousin. The EIE started it by calling me out specifically for a certain act I may or may not have taken part in....accusing me OF taking part in it because I had confided it to her. (Nothing stays confidential in that circle though, clearly.) This was a truely fucked up moment. Later on in the night he and I had it out in an argument of sorts, but he was too drunk to make any sense so I was just like, "What?! Say what you mean! What are you getting at just spit it out!" And he just walked off into the bedroom, and the EIE said, "He doesn't want to say anything to hurt your feelings and blah blah blah..." Which made NO SENSE TO ME WHAT SO EVER...seeing as he was saying all sorts of rude things all night, so I said, "What the hell else can he do to me! Damn!"....a few minutes later, after she went in there to talk to him, he came out and looked me in the eye and apologized for being a drunken asshole. I still wonder if he would have ever felt bad for it if she hadn't talked to him...


I don't really get in the way of relationships or have ever done anything to be a homewrecker of any sort. Whenever I rough house with this LSI though, the EIE gets really pissed off at me thinking that this is some form of flirtation. I usually laugh at this...which of course makes her more angry....I laugh because it's ridiculous. I KNOW that the LSI would never ever ever choose me over her...any day! Not even just sexually or hormonally. I know she's being silly.


I feel a bit bad for only talking about this bad side of things. We are actually exroommates now and she lives with him. But they really are good friends, especially the EIE since I've known her for so long. Its just really hard to trust her because...well she also has other friends that she tells my business to. But who am I to talk, I'm telling their business here I guess right? Well...it has to do with me too so thats different. I know she feeds stories to her ESE friend....so now this ESE thinks I'm a huge whore...and says it too my face and what not. It's kind of hilarious though, its impossible for me to be offended by this creature...she's just too funny when she says the insane things she says. And its really really really fun to taunt and provoke her. She always tells me to stay away from her boyfriend, and more recently her brother who is my age. She will put pillows between us if we get to close to each other...she'll call me out and tell me to get away...she will try to ban me from my own kitchen if he is in there. THATS SOME BULLSHIT! LOL! She's utterly ridiculous. Apparently she's warned both her brother and boyfriend about me. Luckily I got some one-on-one talk time with her brother and he told me that he thinks THEY are the coocoo one's. (and even though she was soooo rude to me, i respectfully didnt even try to "get" him...he didnt't seem all that susceptible to me anyways. which is alright, i enjoyed his company either way, he cracked me up all night. i made a joke about him being gay to the EIE (cuz he's a baseball player too...cmon its funny!) and she took it seriously...told the ESE...and the ESE text me something like, "My brother isn't gay and I'm GLAD he didn't do anything with you!" I said, "LOL *her name*!!! Chill the fuck out...I don't think he's gay and I didn't even try to do anything with him in the first place! HAH!" To which she merely and strangely replied, "Ok thanks." ??????!??!? lol????


Alright sorrrry for the stories....I'm prone to telling stories....its a bad habit I guess.


I think my point is that they are not all as bad as I made them sound....just condescending assholes every now and again.

[Ezra]

mutual attraction is important, but there are other ways it can be expressed instead of the girl being very physical.

True. And, of course, if I'm truly attracted to them, I should be physically aroused enough to fuck. If not, clearly I've made the wrong choice, and I'm just getting with her because I'm using my head instead of my cock.

I am Queen. Worship me and my body, then you shall be rewarded.



my beta roommate (eie) accuses me of going after guys just to prove that i can...in a way i am doing that...but thats not WHY im doing it. im doing it because it's fun. challenging. good times. and i want to get laid. im not really trying to prove that im more attractive, which is what girls often feel threatened by. i dont even consider myself that attractive to most guys because of my height and stature...so im usually surprised when my hunt works out.

if i get drunk, and you're playing hard to get, then its all over for you my friend. i'll get vicious.

the guys who throw themselves at me, or make it too easy im not interested in. except george. bwahahahahaaaaaa

Interesting...I don't really do those things like batting eye lashes or expose the breasts. She's randomly confided to me that I'm intimidating to her. But, ever since she's found her LSI boyfriend they are always just ripping into me about who I sleep with. It's done humorously most of the time, but sometimes its just kind of fucked up. I can't tell her anything without her telling him, and he makes fun of me more than she will...and more harshly. It doesn't really hurt my feelings...but I'm left just feeling kind of annoyed and betrayed. HAH, usually we'd all end up drinking and it would get really bad....but he and I would just go out front and have it out throwing punches at each other. (not at our faces just in the arms and stuff) His Se was realllllly fun to play with....we had power games going all the time and he'd use his serious mean face to try and get me to back down. This barely worked, except for one time when I thought he really was pissed at me for something. And he clearly wasn't afraid to hurt me so...I kinda backed off.


I actually don't really FLIRT like most people do, unless I've had a few drinks. Then I get REALLLLLY giggly and loud. But usually, I attract my prey by acting like I don't want to be wherever I am (sometimes I really don't want to be there) and then they try and amuse me. Then I'll act like I think they are nothing, which weeds out the ones who are not worthy. For some reason a lot of guys like this. They think its funny when I act a little grumpy and slightly narcissistic, like its a challenge to amuse me to get me in a fair mood. If they are trying to make me HAPPY I am prone to not liking them that much...for this points to Fe-ish atmosphere controllers! ESTp's are alright though, they usually focus on making me laugh which is alright. There is a difference between laughing at things and being "happy".


I do things like eye flirting. Which is just random glances, met by other eyes...raised eye brows and making faces and laughing...the more prolonged this is the more rewarding it can be.

Remind me to never EVER flirt around ESE's again. They HATE it. They are uber threatened it seems....

I'm not even really a "slut". I think I'm like any other girl, pursuing what she wants. I don't prefer hunting. I'd much rather have a steady "knight in shining armor" or "royal advisor"...whatever the fuck. I've always had a flirty personality though, without trying. Girls didn't like me in high school, because whenever I'd talk to their boyfriends they thought I was stealing them. I just merely preferred male company over female....

Remind me why you're a Six? And why are you not a Seven?

The accusation from the EIE is probably partly out of a weird desire that they could do the same thing as well. I can be an outrageous flirt and my SEE friend ALWAYS comments on that, but I'm all teasing and she's actually a seducer. I'd feel ridiculous doing half the things she does without even consciously thinking about it - dipping her shoulders to show off her breasts, looking at boys through her lashes, pouting and leaning toward them...I've tried and I just collapsed in hopeless laughter at myself halfway through it.

Seriously, you should try it sometime. You'd be surprised at what simple bodily cues such as these can do to a guy. You certainly won't look stupid doing it. Women are often far too self-conscious when it comes to being sexy. Often all you really need to do is just look at us, and we instantly want you. Then, if you're feeling sexy enough and secure within yourself (as your SEE friend seems to be), you can pull off the stuff she does effortlessly, and you'll probably pull something else, too.

Watching her in action is very amusing. She doesn't have any desire to necessarily get it to go anywhere - everyone is fair game as well. Actually, that can be annoying. Even with guys who are with you, she'll sort of do the same routine. She doesn't plan to steal them or anything, it's her just who she is: do you want me? Ok! Next. She even gets territorial when we're just talking with a male friend and will sort of jut a shoulder out, blocking me with her body, and making really steadfast, intense eye contact. I get annoyed, but I'm sure I play my own type of games as well, just less...overtly sexual.

Brilliant example of Se.

My SEE tells me about the people she sleeps with and sometimes says 'oh I'm such a slut' and she completely isn't. Slut is such a misogynistic term anyway.

You know how it arose, don't you? The human race is indoctrinated from birth to believe that sexual games are immoral. Obviously, because of society's double standards, males will gladly fuck about with various women and won't ever have to worry about the consequences ("not my womb or emotions"). Of course, when a woman attempts to express her sexuality (as she should be allowed to), she gets demonised for it.

[idolatrie]

Seriously, you should try it sometime. You'd be surprised at what simple bodily cues such as these can do to a guy. You certainly won't look stupid doing it. Women are often far too self-conscious when it comes to being sexy. Often all you really need to do is just look at us, and we instantly want you. Then, if you're feeling sexy enough and secure within yourself (as your SEE friend seems to be), you can pull off the stuff she does effortlessly, and you'll probably pull something else, too.

Ezra, you can put this response down to me overreacting, but I feel I have to say this.

No, she really shouldn't try it sometime. She should not have to act like a sexually available ever, especially not to attract guys, because that is merely pandering to some hyper-sexualised male conception of women. Her charm has nothing to do with putting herself out there physically, and if she tried to, she would probably look uncomfortable and thus silly. Sexy and secure does not mean being sexually overt. Women and sexuality are not a homogenous construct. To presume that there is only one way, or even to suggest that there is a 'best' way for girls to pull guys is massively reductionist.

I have seen girls attempt to be sexual when they are clearly uncomfortable in that role. It's sad and vaguely desperate. Would it not be more appealing for a woman to be allowed to express herself in whichever way suits her best? Rather than what is dictated by the desires of the masculine gaze? The hypersexualisation and raunch culture of our society is such a big problem with how women are allowed to identify and delineate themselves and the idea that a woman should be sexually available to entice guys is highly problematic for me.

She doesn't need to pretend to be anything other than herself to be attractive and get as many guys as she wants.

[unefille]

You know how it arose, don't you? The human race is indoctrinated from birth to believe that sexual games are immoral. Obviously, because of society's double standards, males will gladly fuck about with various women and won't ever have to worry about the consequences ("not my womb or emotions"). Of course, when a woman attempts to express her sexuality (as she should be allowed to), she gets demonised for it.

The construct of gender and sexuality is incredibly complicated, but yes, that's essentially it. People have an incredibly fucked up way of dealing with sexuality. Yet I would argue that the suppression and repression of sexuality - the regulation of it as something both delicate and dirty is what in fact produces sexuality as it is constructed. The normalisation of sex would frankly be quite dull. It would remove all the excitement, all the frisson, all the ideational constructs built on top of what is a very simple act and transforms it into a ritual, and leave it rather prosaic. The production of sexuality has a lot of answer for in the moral haranguing of sexual desires, but it is also central to maintenance of this fascination with sexual desires.

My objection therefore isn't with the regulation of sex, but with the double standards that you described. My even greater objection to it is when women use misogynistic terms in order to affirm their own position in some bullshit hierarchy of gender and slander other women and the way in which sensible, well-educated girls, buy into that shit.

[Nexus]

The construct of gender and sexuality is incredibly complicated, but yes, that's essentially it. People have an incredibly fucked up way of dealing with sexuality. Yet I would argue that the suppression and repression of sexuality - the construction of it as something both delicate and dirty is what in fact produces sexuality as it is constructed. The normalisation of sex would frankly be quite dull. It would remove all the excitement, all the frisson, all the ideational constructs built on top of what is a very simple act and transforms it into a ritual, and leave it rather prosaic. The production of sexuality has a lot of answer for in the moral haranguing of sexual desires, but it is also central to maintenance of this fascination with sexual desires.

My objection therefore isn't with the regulation of sex, but with the double standards that you described. My even greater objection to it is when women use misogynistic terms in order to affirm their own position in some bullshit hierarchy of gender and slander other women and the way in which sensible, well-educated girls, buy into that shit.

That was so ENFj

[Ezra]

Ezra, you can put this response down to me overreacting, but I feel I have to say this.

No, she really shouldn't try it sometime. She should not have to act like a sexually available ever, especially not to attract guys, because that is merely pandering to some hyper-sexualised male conception of women. Her charm has nothing to do with putting herself out there physically, and if she tried to, she would probably look uncomfortable and thus silly. Sexy and secure does not mean being sexually overt. Women and sexuality are not a homogenous construct. To presume that there is only one way, or even to suggest that there is a 'best' way for girls to pull guys is massively reductionist.

I have seen girls attempt to be sexual when they are clearly uncomfortable in that role. It's sad and vaguely desperate. Would it not be more appealing for a woman to be allowed to express herself in whichever way suits her best? Rather than what is dictated by the desires of the masculine gaze? The hypersexualisation and raunch culture of our society is such a big problem with how women are allowed to identify and delineate themselves and the idea that a woman should be sexually available to entice guys is highly problematic for me.

She doesn't need to pretend to be anything other than herself to be attractive and get as many guys as she wants.

No, that isn't an overreaction. Cheers for straightening it out. It's important.

[unefille]

There is plausibly a limited number of ways for a woman to get an unlimited supply of men. However, there is also something to be said of quality (although varying kinds of qualities. "Overtness" may be preferred by some, and on either side of the gaze.) It might at least be said that Ezra's advice isn't advisable universally.

If the aim is an 'unlimited supply of men' (the thought boggles the mind, in more ways then one), then behaving differently and altering one's behaviour is probably necessary.

I don't think Ezra's advice is universally applicable and the way in which women attract men will vary according to the individual and particularly, since this is a socionics forum, according to type. Therefore, it is arguable that acting 'out of type' (what's your flavour?) is unadvisable if you want to attract a compatible type. I'll leave the sexually aggressive behaviour for the aggressors for now, though of course, I took what Ezra said in the spirit of well-meaning. It's always fun to role-play and change it up anyway.

This conversation makes me lol.

[Ezra]

Yeah, I was being well-meaning; certainly not malicious.

However, idolatrie has a valid point. She's pretty much shown me how I'm so set in what I think about women that I don't even realise I'm categorising them and being sexist.

[FDG]

So where are the naked pictures after all this writing?

[unefille]

So where are the naked pictures after all this writing?

Oh, they're around. You just have to focus really really HARD (as hard as Phaedrus studies socionics, I would say) to see them.

[unefille]

Just saying what may be a process of "hypersexualisation" to one type may be "the way of nature" to others of a different final "construction". For example, it wouldn't surprise me if a number of SEE feel Western society still doesn't prefer "availability" enough. (To be clear though, I'm not saying that's what I prefer necessarily.)

My SEE has said that to me numerous times, so I understand and agree with your point.

[idolatrie]

Well there were extrapolations to be made from that. Among them, one must consider both the process and the result. Perhaps among some types (particularly when one dual is naturally "hard to get") it's only natural for the other dual to "pander" somewhat. Add to that a tendency for the later dual to be more frequent than most others before settling down.

Just saying what may be a process of "hypersexualisation" to one type may be "the way of nature" to others of a different final "construction". For example, it wouldn't surprise me if a number of SEE feel Western society still doesn't prefer "availability" enough. (To be clear though, I'm not saying that's what I prefer necessarily.)

Correct me if I'm misinterpreting what you're saying, but if this had anything to do with my reply to Ezra earlier in this thread, I don't see how what I said in any way invalidated the legitimacy of *any* expression of female sexuality. I have no problem with sexually aggressive women. I think a woman who is comfortable with her sexuality, no matter what form it takes, is something to be celebrated. I took issue with the suggestion that being sexually available/overt is the only mode of being appealing - and I think that disagreement here has been neutralised already.

[Cuddly McFluffles]

You know how it arose, don't you? The human race is indoctrinated from birth to believe that sexual games are immoral. Obviously, because of society's double standards, males will gladly fuck about with various women and won't ever have to worry about the consequences ("not my womb or emotions"). Of course, when a woman attempts to express her sexuality (as she should be allowed to), she gets demonised for it.

While I happen to be on the conservative end of the moral spectrum, I wholeheartedly agree that there is a hideous double standard. I just happen to think that both should be held responsible rather than the male's promiscuity being celebrated.

That was so ENFj

I liked it.

[Khamelion]

Every girl/woman should find their own way of "seducing" or whatever you want to call it. No one way is better, because intentions and goals vary person to person. Not to mention, in a socionics sense, different behaviors will attract a certain types dual. I'm thinkin' that an ILI is going to need obvious signals from me to know what I want. > That isn't entirely true....because sex isn't all I am looking for. But whenever I do seem to attract someone in a scenario like I explained earlier, after I have them trying to talk to me...I start to bring up subjects of discussion that are not suited for the atmosphere whatsoever. I start sort of...intellectual discussions to see how they react. Not ONLY to see how they react, but also because Im usually so bored that thats the only sort of thing I want to talk about. Interesting things...

I think Ezra was trying to tell you that you can summon the confidence that is required to act like the SEE does. Like a, "Hey friend! You can do it too! Put your mind to it!" Sort of thing. Not so much telling you thats how you SHOULD do it. You are not looking for the same results as the SEE. If you ever find yourself envious, just remember that she probably isn't TRYING to make you envious...its her own personal goal-game. (at least this is the case with me, im strangely unaware of how it effects of others around me) Also take comfort in the fact that you COULD do the same thing if you wanted to...you've observed enough to know how to mimic the behavior. You just arn't interested and want something different. The SEE probably wants something different too, she's just too bored to realize it. (this is where my EIE would get upset because she isn't curing my boredom, hehhehe)

Remind me why you're a Six? And why are you not a Seven?

I see 7's as more....energetic and bubbly. Being high-energy most of the time and constantly on the go...and that just doesn't really fit me. I CAN be like that...when I'm at my best...healthy....on track. But I can't keep that up constantly. I'm a lazy fool. Also...I might be ESI? >_>

Why do those paragraphs you quoted seem more 7 than 6?

[Lotus]

I see 7's as more....energetic and bubbly. Being high-energy most of the time and constantly on the go...and that just doesn't really fit me. I CAN be like that...when I'm at my best...healthy....on track. But I can't keep that up constantly. I'm a lazy fool. Also...I might be ESI? >_>

Why do those paragraphs you quoted seem more 7 than 6?

I think your perception of seven is somewhat skewed. Sevens aren't always energetic or bubbly. I hate how anyone who seems remotely energetic, extroverted, or ADD is an automatic seven. Enneagram types are about people's core fixations. Why would everyone who is "energetic and bubbly" have the same basic fear and underlying wants? And what could those possibly be? The real crux of E7 is the desire to be satisfied and content. Why the fuck would me being obnoxiously cheerful when I'm really not satisfy that desire? It wouldn't. I wish people would understand that. Sevens are often the most popular type to want to be (see one of Machintruc's stupid polls) and this is because we seem "happier" or something. And the thing is, it's a contradicting sort of happiness.

When you read about sevens you'll often come across something like "disconnected from the heart" or "out of touch with their essential nature" or something. This is something I've only recently been aware of. I'm extremely out of touch with my feelings, and the only reason I know they are there is if they manifest physically. Throughout my life some really difficult things have happened to me, but while they are happening I don't really notice how difficult they are. Something very bad could be happening to me and I won't know how it makes me feel until I can literally (as in physically) feel its effects. For instance, I can experience something that really hurts me emotionally and not realize I'm hurt at all. I still feel fine and think nothing is wrong. But then I'll be sitting or walking or doing something during the day and I'll start crying. And I'll think why am I crying right now? Nothing is wrong with you, stop crying. I thought I was oversensitive or something, though now I look back on it as numbness more than anything. Another way this happens with me is nausea. Do you ever literally feel like you could throw up when you're nervous or worried? Well, I rarely notice I'm bothered or uncomfortable until I feel like I'm about to be sick. And then I start to get anxious and panic. Shit, something is wrong. Oh God, what did I forget? What did I do? Who or what am I so scared/worried about?

And see-- this is what causes those "seven-like" behaviors everyone identifies us by. I never know what's bothering me. And most of the time I don't even know I'm bothered in the first place, unless it happens to manifest physically (which is rare). So if I am truly bothered by something, I'll feel it. And when I feel it I want to get rid of it. Because unlike most people, I don't feel it internally. I cannot reflect on it and understand it. I experience my problems in a very physical nature. It's not pleasent so my first instinct is to just get rid of it. Because it's physical, writing doesn't help, reflecting doesn't help, and talking about it certainly doesn't help either. Physical problems can only be solved ("distracted") physically. If I'm crying on the outside but without any clue why on the inside, I do the opposite of what is "sad" by shaking it off and being energetic or doing something that would feel good. I go out, play music, run, yell, laugh, drive... anything. I've only known what physical sadness feels like. Talking to anyone about it doesn't make a physical sensation go away. I don't like people.

And about nausea-- the way anything I'm stressed or worried about feels. I don't notice I'm worried until I feel an anxiety in my stomach. I'll feel like vomiting or hyperventilating (this is very extreme, and has only occurred twice or so in my life). And it always comes out of no where to me. Being "disconnected from the heart" or whatever just makes it seem that way. I'll be okay and then suddenly feel anxious or sick. I'll feel nervous or freaked out. I'll want to throw up. And I'm thinking, where the fuck did this come from? Something is wrong. Something is wrong. Oh God. What the fuck is wrong? And it's purely physical of course. I don't understand what the underlying problem is. So to get rid of it, I do everything. A lot of types like to think they are sevens because sevens are described as possibility-seeking or whatever. They don't seem to understand how different this is. I'm not open to possibilities in any way... this is about me feeling physical pain and anxiety and my head is racing to fix it. I pace a lot, I panic. I try everything to get rid of this sensation of sickness. I just want to be satisfied, okay, content. I suppose I strongly identify with the seven's basic fear of "being deprived and in pain" and their desire: "To be satisfied and content—to have their needs fulfilled."

But yeah, most of the time the problems are not extreme enough to manifest physically. So most of the time I don't think there's a problem. Other people will tell me I'm bothered and I say I'm not. I think I don't get offended easily, but now I'm not so sure about that. I think the problem is that "being offended" doesn't have a physical manifestation. I never feel offended, so the only time I "get offended" is when it violates an internal rule. If I know something to be wrong then I get offended. It's never personally connected to me. I don't feel wrong or right, I know something to be wrong or right.

Agh I could keep writing but I just realized how long this is already when it was meant to be a short paragraph. Sorry about that


EDIT: And yeah, a lot of this has to do with being "Positive Outlook" harmonic. This whole thing results in me being a generally optimistic person lol

Sevens do not typically internalize their experiences; they remain somewhat unattached to people and things. In conflict, Sevens can quickly discard things and cancel commitments (ie., the needs of others) without feelings of regret. It is easier to move on to happier things than to stay with things that depress. Sevens tend to reject the needs of others in favour of fulfilling their own.

[Ezra]

Why do those paragraphs you quoted seem more 7 than 6?

It's not those paragraphs specifically; rather that the general vibe conveyed in those particular posts is very representative of your speech and behaviour. However, one thing that did stick out to me was how you said that when you go after a guy, you want a challenge and it's a lot of fun. I didn't really see that as being very Six-like, even for someone who experiences counterphobia more often than not.

Bear in mind that not all Sevens are what you might call "motivated". Many of them are, and the stereotype is that they are, but consider Homer Simpson as an example of a Seven who is the epitome of lazy and unmotivated. What characterises the Seven is their insatiable desire for enjoyment, pleasure and the good things in life; all in excess. Many Sevens (SEIs, for example), will attempt to derive the most enjoyment from an activity with the least exertion, simply because of their psychological make up. The drive of the Seven is not to do with psychology (although, ironically, the Seven is a Head type) so much as it is to do with human impulses. Obviously the make up will have an affect on how the Seven would go about pursuing their pleasures, but the fundamental instinct - the need for pleasure - is not necessarily always pursued in a very active (and often hyper) way.

Food for thought, Kelly.

[strrrng]

It's not those paragraphs specifically; rather that the general vibe conveyed in those particular posts is very representative of your speech and behaviour. However, one thing that did stick out to me was how you said that when you go after a guy, you want a challenge and it's a lot of fun. I didn't really see that as being very Six-like, even for someone who experiences counterphobia more often than not.

Umm, no. I have no clue why you think a 6 wouldn't be aggressive and want a challenge. Have you read the section on sx 6's in the wisdom of the enneagram?

Bear in mind that not all Sevens are what you might call "motivated". Many of them are, and the stereotype is that they are, but consider Homer Simpson as an example of a Seven who is the epitome of lazy and unmotivated.

This stereotype is irrelevant anyway.

What characterises the Seven is their insatiable desire for enjoyment, pleasure and the good things in life; all in excess. Many Sevens (SEIs, for example), will attempt to derive the most enjoyment from an activity with the least exertion, simply because of their psychological make up.

It's not just about enjoyment; it's derived from a search for internal contentment and feeling like their needs are met.

The drive of the Seven is not to do with psychology (although, ironically, the Seven is a Head type) so much as it is to do with human impulses. Obviously the make up will have an affect on how the Seven would go about pursuing their pleasures, but the fundamental instinct - the need for pleasure - is not necessarily always pursued in a very active (and often hyper) way.

Correct.

[FDG]

Isn't being a seven simply the result of, as machintruc would say, having high dopamin and high serotonin? (relatively to all the other E-types, of course) The physiological explanation eliminates a lot of problems, while still validating the personal explanations given by each seven (such as Allie's, for example).

[strrrng]

Isn't being a seven simply the result of, as machintruc would say, having high dopamin and high serotonin? (relatively to all the other E-types, of course) The physiological explanation eliminates a lot of problems, while still validating the personal explanations given by each seven (such as Allie's, for example).

Type 7 has high levels of dopamine, serotonin and norepanephrine. I don't necessarily think that this is a cause of someone being a 7, but more or less, something that comes along with it, and is observed consistently in people of that type.

[Khamelion]

@ Allie - I don't really relate to any of that. >_> I'm usually pretty aware of what I'm feeling and why...there are moments of me getting confused because there is no physical problem yet I am upset...but then I figure it out by realizing the physical problem is internal. I'm not getting something done that I wanted to get done...or I'm lacking some sort of chemical because I havn't eaten properly or slept properly...etc etc...

If I get that nauseated or anxious feeling, it's usually right before I do something I havn't done before and therefore don't know what to expect. If no one tells me how it's going to unfold then I start to imagine everything that can go wrong. When I try to imagine everything that can go wrong...I realize I don't even know what I'm thinking about and I don't even really know what could go wrong...which makes it worse.

Whenever I'm feeling upset by something and I don't really know EXACTLY what it is...I DO talk to people. Rather than go out and do a bunch of random stuff. I do the random stuff AFTER I talk to someone trustworthy. I usually need to get a free-flowing stream of thought going to someone in order to convince myself that I have to go and get out of wherever I am. I don't even really need feed-back half of the time...just someone to listen to my inner thoughts and let me hear them out loud so I can stop dwelling. I don't necessarily NOT like people....I'm pretty critical of them most of the time though...and this can seem cynical. But the ones I talk to are ones I hold in high-regard...an inner circle of sorts. I have several layers of inner circles...kind of like an atom with its rings of neurons and electrons.

A lot of people are unaware that their reactions are coming out of being offended on some level, they just normally see being offended as losing or being weak. But I don't feel like getting into this. It's annoying because it just brings about stubbornness.


@ Ezra

From what you've said, Seven sounds like a legit option. I believe that I just need more information on the enneagram. I don't have an argument for why I choose Six over Seven...I did at one point or another...but it's escaped me...(sounds pretty stupid eh?)

links pls? anyone? everyone?!? gogogogo

Isn't being a seven simply the result of having high dopamin and high serotonin?

I've heard this too. I'm pretty sure I have issues with both of those levels...serotonin especially.

[Nexus]

Type 7 has high levels of dopamine, serotonin and norepanephrine. I don't necessarily think that this is a cause of someone being a 7, but more or less, something that comes along with it, and is observed consistently in people of that type.

That is ridiculous. High levels of dopamine are actually correlated with reductions in novelty seeking behavior...and this idea has already been patented (US Patent 6548502). Haven't we been through this before?

[FDG]

Type 7 has high levels of dopamine, serotonin and norepanephrine. I don't necessarily think that this is a cause of someone being a 7, but more or less, something that comes along with it, and is observed consistently in people of that type.

In machintruc model there's a slight variation, where the level of norephinephrine is connected to being sp-so-sx (sp least nor, so intermediate, sx most). The types would remain distinguished since 2 variables in 3 different states are enough to combine 9 types. It's a nice idea, I'm not certain it applies, but it makes some sense

High levels of dopamine are actually correlated with reductions in novelty seeking behavior

Allright, in the sense that high dopamin levels might make one person fixate on a particular type of "reward" given that the reward pathaway is strongly reinforced. It's actually consistent with the pleasure(reward)-seeking behavior of type 7,3,8. There is still a problem though, where dopamin should actually reinforce both reward and risk-avoidance. This can be still seen under the light of type 7 in the part of "avoidance of pain", in the part of type 3 in the "avoidance of failure", and in type 8 in the "avoidance of being controlled".