LSEs are not anymore sexually demanding of their partners than other types. And you really didn't get the sense that she made fun of your perception of INFj-ESTj duality in that you want to keep the woman safe and want to be the knight in shining armor?Originally Posted by UDP
This is just too silly.But, as I said, this stereotype looks more.... angst-ridden than humorous.
“Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage.”
― Anais Nin
It's more that you constantly nag about this stereotype. I don't see you as doing it humorously - but then again perhaps you are. A lot of your comments seem to be driven from a deep seated angst about people who are that way. If this was just supposed to be "funny", then, so be it, I misinterpreted it. It sounded more like you venting your disgust under the facade of humor.
That's clearly not true. When you show me things and ask me to comment on how funny I am, the majority of the time I don't find them funny. Or do you disagree with that?everything i say is "humorous" except for when you THINK i'm saying something about you, in which case it's "angst-ridden."
I think you meant to say "that you spoke up here means that you are taking this personally, instead of it just being for fun"
Obviously.
I was commenting on how to further negative stereotypes.
Even though I disagreed with it, it could have been made better.
I understood it; it was overridden by what I said above.And you really didn't get the sense that she made fun of your perception of INFj-ESTj duality in that you want to keep the woman safe and want to be the knight in shining armor?
See aboveThis is just too silly.
PS: I suppose me expressing my opinions here were out of place with the nature of the thread. If it's an issue I had with Ritella, it would have been better to do it more privately. Oops, about the spoiled mood of the thread.
Last edited by UDP; 12-13-2008 at 09:23 PM. Reason: PS
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
Are you trying to re-inforce the stereotype that ESTj's are asses?
Seriously though dude, you joke about INFj's all the time, that they make doughnuts and brownies..or is it cookies and brownies? Well you joke about this sort of thing often. Why are you the only person allowed to crack the jokes here? .. Or are you being serious with the brownies?
Take it easy
THANK YOU, Cyclops and Kim.
I think UDP is in a bad mood- which makes him suspicious of everyone- so instead of taking this as a joke, he's taking it as an insult.
So what's so obviously "angst-ridden" is only obvious to him bc he's projecting like a completely blind jack-ass.
Look, UDP, honestly this has to be the 30th time you've done something like this to me. I haven't broken my ass my entire life so that I can aspire to being victimized by some dipshit over the internet. If you have problems with someone or something, take it out on that person or thing; not me, unless I am that person.
I seriously will not tolerate this anymore. I'm not bound to be your friend in any way. There's no reason why any healthy person should resign himself to an essentially abusive relationship.
Oh, and yes, you've pissed me off.
EII; E6(w5)
i am flakey
If you understood what I wrote, you'd see that I didn't see it as a joke. But apparently I was wrong.
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
I thought you probs weren't joking, but I was looking to give you a way out and I hoped in my little post it would in perhaps some small way would help you to see you could be over-reacting a little.
Que title of the thread, que the posts etc: It's all been tongue in cheek, ya? Hope you feel in better mood later dude.
You didn't see it as a joke? How is that possible? I'm confused. You said that the stereotype doesn't even hold true because of the sex thing, so the rest was true and not a joke in your eyes? Did she describe your perfect partner?
“Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage.”
― Anais Nin
I think that is the sad irony here.
UDP will prob throw a shit-fit now, but I don't care. I think part of the reason why he got so amped about that is that it IS how he sees EIIs and what he likes about them.
Like, was he actually kidding when he started the whole brownie thing?
EII; E6(w5)
i am flakey
It seemed like it went beyond the realm of joke. However, that seems to be bringing in information outside of this thread. My reaction was based off of those things at play outside of the thread, and in retrospect, I shouldn't have commented about them on here. But I didn't particularly realize the consequences at the time.
I'm not sure what you are trying to say here. I was commenting on different things, and perhaps I didn't differentiate them properly.You said that the stereotype doesn't even hold true because of the sex thing, so the rest was true and not a joke in your eyes?
The bit about marriage, and having no sex, was more correcting an inaccuracy. It wasn't related to my personal dislike of the thread.
And, this is kind of a subtle thing, but, that she labeled the person as "not having sex" even after marriage was one of the things that made it seem like it was not a joke or a stereotype, but more personal disgust.
I don't understand why you are asking that. To answer it literally, no, she did not describe my perfect partner.Did she describe your perfect partner?
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
Yes, now I'm a sad and terrible person to you. I won't victimize you anymore, don't worry.
No, and I was never in a bad mood in the first place. If you're serious about me being quite upset, then that seems to show that you don't know where I'm coming from.UDP will prob throw a shit-fit now, but I don't care.
(apparently, you're the one throwing a shit fit. Thanks for disowning me here)
I explained my reasoning.I think part of the reason why he got so amped about that is that it IS how he sees EIIs and what he likes about them.
Like, was he actually kidding when he started the whole brownie thing
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
WHY SO SRS?!
This could only be true if love was an overblown myth of holding on to a fleeting moment in a delusion of sexual passion, ego fulfillment and vanity.
Have you ever been with an IxTp?His Ixtp exes probably need therapy
[]
| NP | 3[6w5]8 so/sp | Type thread | My typing of forum members | Johari (Strengths) | Nohari (Weaknesses)
You know what? You're an individual, and that makes people nervous. And it's gonna keep making people nervous for the rest of your life. - Ole Golly from Harriet, the spy.
Yes, 3 years with an INTp and 5 years with an ISTp. They were not very expressive when it came to showing love, but they showed it in their own way. I would say that IxTps are reluctant to let themselves fall in love because they are so suspicious and guarded by nature, but when they give in, they don't love any less than other types.
“Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage.”
― Anais Nin
Then you should already know that they are rather oblivious to their own emotional life. It might be obvious for you that they are in love; but internally they are always doubtful about what they are feeling. That's why I say they don't know what love is; not because they are unable to love.Yes, 3 years with an INTp and 5 years with an ISTp. They were not very expressive when it came to showing love, but they showed it in their own way. I would say that IxTps are reluctant to let themselves fall in love because they are so suspicious and guarded by nature, but when they give in, they don't love any less than other types.
[
You know what? You're an individual, and that makes people nervous. And it's gonna keep making people nervous for the rest of your life. - Ole Golly from Harriet, the spy.
They are not oblivious. They can even have a rather tumultuous emotional life and be painfully aware of the, but they are not comfortable expressing that or talking about it, which is why they might seem oblivious to it when they are not.
They also might take longer to accept what they are feeling, but I am sure they don't remain doubtful forever. Perhaps we should ask the IxTps around here?
“Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage.”
― Anais Nin
It sound like you can define love there Mikemex.
Edit: I wrote a reply, then edited it. Suffice it to say that IXTp's are aware of love, and it's something that can scare them and can take time to trust someone. Maybe you haven't reached that level yet, or you have insight that no one else is aware of, or it depends on person, dunno.
Last edited by Cyclops; 12-14-2008 at 06:41 AM.
This sounds like an ISTp in love!<3
“Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage.”
― Anais Nin
sounds nice
This sounds like an ISTp in love!
This isn't about sex, it's about brownies.
First of all, the Si type is responsible for brownie making. Secondly, in LSE/EII duality, the Ne type is responsible for thinking. As my son puts it about his LSE dad and his EII step mom, "Diana always makes a big deal out of nothing, and then my dad gets mad at me." I tell him to try to reason with his dad, but apparently his dad does whatever Diana says.
.
nah, that is just being a decent dude.This sounds like an ISTp in love!
6w5 sx
model Φ: -+0
sloan - rcuei
I agree with this. I don't think i've ever experienced being in love while in a relationship. Months after a breakup and after I've analyzed the situation, I can realize it was love. It's rough.
...
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
You feel the same way? It's a sad state of affairs.
"Love" can mean a lot of different things, but I think in a successful relationship it starts out as a mutual attraction, involves shared values and compatibility, and then evolves into a decision to commit to a way of life and to the relationship. The type of "love" that's strictly a "feeling" is pretty much just for movies and songs and poems and whatnot.
Last edited by Joy; 12-15-2008 at 11:51 AM.
that sounds rather boring.
Why were you in the relationship if not for love?
Crushes and infatuation are exciting, but not lasting. They last six months to three years, at the most. If you want to build a life with someone, the relationship can't be dependent upon "exciting" feelings.
That doesn't mean that crushes and infatuation can't turn into something solid.
“Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage.”
― Anais Nin
That's what this part is about
Why would you want a build a life with someone. That's kind of like tying a noose around your head, and hanging yourself.
Like a business partnership, that then deterioates into one of the partners "cheating" on the other one.
Creating friction in the "business" partnership.
Fuck that shit. Keep things simple. Don't get attached.
That's what a "partner" is. In duality it's nice because you're each responsible for the things that the other doesn't want to do or can't do well. Makes life a lot easier, plus you share values so you're working towards the same thing. If having an endless stream of crushes sounds more appealing, it's probably just because you're not in that life stage.
Maybe, depending on the relationship.That's kind of like tying a noose around your head, and hanging yourself.
A good partnership can accomplish a lot more than a single person can. Partnerships can be broken off if the arrangement is no longer meeting everyone's needs, too. "Cheating" is unnecessary.
No, but I agree that it is sad...
I disagree that "love as a feeling" doesn't exist. And yes, I'm talking about more than infatuation. Granted, a relationship that lasts into a serious marriage has to be more than just feelings, but I disagree with the assertion that love is not an emotion.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
You just said the same thing I did.
lol. of course love is an emotion. i don't think anyone's debating that.
EII; E6(w5)
i am flakey
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
