Experiences with Superego Relations

[redbaron]

Anyone have experience with this relation? Especially introvert superego relations? Wherein lie the misunderstandings? Intentions? Actions? What?

[Jarno]

I was scary for the conflicts that would arise, but I haven't experienced them yet.

I've had a brief relationships with ISFP women. It starts easely, because of the same temperament, but probably even more because of the seemingly Ideal partner.

Although I recently saw in a threat Strnggg (INFP) and Cyclops (ISTP) have a big fight, they are superego too... so I guess the fights can be pretty mean.

But so far for me personally, superego relations are fine. Yet the socionics descriptions still scares me enough not to look for another superego girlfriend.

BTW now I remember a particular trait of this relationship which stood out. One partner is too clingy. In my case the ISFP women was way to clingy. Also the reason I broke the relationship. I've had this similar experience with an male ISFP aquantance of mine. They both kept page messaging me for a year... after I broke contact.

[1981slater]

Super ego and conflictor relationship are the worst by FAR. Avoid it, at any cost. Another point of view is to believe that gamma SFs are bad for every non gamma person. Who knows? Fuck gamma SFs! (I mean down with them-hate-fury, not romantic relationship with them)

[jessica129]

It's really rough...really, really rough. Really.



I think the number one thing that sticks out for me is the major misunderstandings that hurt each other to the core.

[redbaron]

It's really rough...really, really rough. Really.



I think the number one thing that sticks out for me is the major misunderstandings that hurt each other to the core.

Oh right. I think I remember you posting about a relationship you had with an IEI.

It makes a certain amount of sense (to me anyway) that the ethical one would be the more clingy. Was that true in your case, Jessica?

[redbaron]

And what do you think these misunderstandings ride on? Assumptions that the other one knows what's going on when they don't? Or assuming you value the same things when you don't. Or... what?

I'm not sure I've ever known an SLI irl except for my hair person (who's great but obviously we're not that close and there's a chance she could be LSI).

[Bardia]

I have a pretty good frienship with an INTj. We don't do a lot of stuff together and she is at least 10 years olders so that might help. I know that we both do make an effort to make sure misunderstandings are resolved and we do have misunderstandings.

I had another friend who I thought might be INTj. We fought a lot and often intensely.

Super ego and conflictor relationship are the worst by FAR. Avoid it, at any cost. Another point of view is to believe that gamma SFs are bad for every non gamma person. Who knows? Fuck gamma SFs! (I mean down with them-hate-fury, not romantic relationship with them)

Your just jealous.

[Brilliand]

I just got this message on Tribal Wars:

check out how close these guy's are to you...

and they are on our side...

and eventually will take over this K

- The Huns .1 (911|350) K39

- Immunesoul#055 no1 can Take me (913|363) K39

- SUBV#039 (904|370) K39

- kix 9 (901|354) K39

if you would like to join let me know...

i know these guy's...

they want points...

and they won't stop...

(not trying to start anything)...

He's made an enemy.

[Ezra]

Posted this at socionics workshop, but it looks inactive and shit and like I won't get a reply for at least a week.

I recently split up with my girlfriend of four months, who I initially thought was EIE. Then I thought about IEE. I didn't see how me, an SLE, and her, my activation partner, could possibly be incompatible, given my fantastic relations with two EIEs who I deem my best friends, as well as possibly two other EIEs who I consider to be good friends. On top of this, other EIEs I've met I am instantly drawn to.

Now, when I first met my girlfriend, I was instantly drawn to her. This, I've been thinking, is because I saw Fe and Ni in her and liked it.

I read the intertype relations on socionics.us a few days ago, particularly the activation and superego ones, and I was surprised by just how "good" the superego relations could look. In fact, it struck me as being highly accurate in describing our relations and some of the reasons they ended.

So, can superego relations look hopeful to start with? More over, could a relationship be successfully had for four months before it started becoming obvious that what she wanted and what I had (Te and Si) I simply didn't value, and vice versa? Or is it impossible that it could last so long without my recognising that she was clearly from a different - opposite - quadra, and thus other factors must be responsible? FTR, she is definitely IEE or EIE. It's not even worth considering other options.

[The Exception]

I haven't had much luck with my superego type. They tend to rub me the wrong way without them meaning to. I wonder if they feel the same way about me.

[smilodon]

I had an ESE friend in high school, and it seemed like we would be bffs, but then when we hung out about a year ago, it was clear I had gone seperate from my class, which was primarily Alpha, with a few betas and deltas thrown in. I can only think of one other person who I would guess as gamma. BTW, my class had 34 kids in it.

[Gilly]

People have married their conflictors; I'm sure it's possible to even have a successful marriage with a super-ego. It's also plausible to have a bad relationship with a dual or activator. There is more to people than Socionics; with that in mind, type her objectively, look at what actually caused the breakup and determine whether it had to do with Socionics or something else, consider what other things might have caused it, and you will have your answer.

[07490]

Umm, I think that IEE-SLE Super ego relationship is one of the better Super-ego relationship as least if you compare EIE/LSE which I think it would have been one of the bottom. From a general observation I have seen in surface, SLE/IEE gets along very well, just like how super-ego relationship mentioned that both partner has a warm relationship initially, like you also have with your ex-girlfriend. I can even see both of them hooking up instantly especially if they both have the same enneagram type. because they seek your 7th and 8th functions which is strong but that you don't value it, and vice versa, you get a commonly warm reception if you guys try to engaged with each other, pushing the relationship, all at glance its very attractive, with EIE you might not experience this and you might even find your self holding back because there is too much energy by both your side that you want to calm a little down or activate other(if both are in the mood), while one being a dynamic and one being static you can see that they are not really in the "rhythm" as you, but once its activated energy just bills up, with two static types that would be different.

[jewels]

I dated an ESTp a few times and thought he was an ISTp because he was fairly quiet. Because of that I was more giddy than usual and probably appeared a bit Fe-ish. I imagine he probably thought I was more INFp-ish than I am (as I can come across that way if I'm a bit shy). I'm not INFp-ish at all though. So I sorta saw the end coming quickly when I realized that and stopped going out w/ him. I think we would have had mutual respect and some boredom as well. Also, both are somewhat "showy" types in different yet similar ways, and I think it's better that only one person prefer behind the scenes to the spotlight.

He seemed to be a Ti subtype, which also probably made him seem more quiet.

All in all, I get along w/ ESTps just fine, as I seem to have quite a few around. But they're not like my "ideal" that I will doodle in my notebook about. More that I respect what they're doing and admire their Se, and wish I could be that commanding, but not enough to try.

Is Shrek an ESTp btw? The way that Shrek is so good hearted is something I see in ESTps.

But also, like others said, there are so, so, so many factors in relationships beyond socionics. Just someone's energy or vibe can either mesh w/ yours or repel you. Or how fast they walk or the way they say certain words or the way they smell (a DNA match/mismatch is what you're smelling I've read). And so all of these things can be pointing "good things this way! ---->" But they might not be a socionics match (which of course isn't the only factor). I've now taken a new approach. Now I just look at a person and if I don't immediately think "aww!" and feel sorta warm n fuzzy like when I see a puppy, I don't want to date them. That's my usual response to types like ISFps or ISTps or more compatible types. Their expressions make me think "aww!" (inside my mind of course, I don't actually say that). So maybe that approach would help? Good luck Break ups suck

[Ezra]

Looking back on the situation, I realized that I was acting in a manner similar to my mother: doing things for other people in order to be needed, and trying to fill a void of disconnection in the relationship, instead of focusing on the real matter, which was whether or not we worked together as regular people and as friends with no strings attached. It was about expectations of what romance and a relationship should be, some of which were unrealistic and unnecessary. I think women tend to appreciate romantic gestures and use it as a gauge to decide how much you care that they're in your life. But they don't like having to tell you those things, because then they feel like you're just placating them and it hasn't arisen from your genuine sentiments.

God, that's a mindfuck

Yeah that's it, you've got it, tiny_dancer. That's exactly how she was thinking. Something else I forgot to add was that she said to me (at least a few days, possibly a week, before we broke up) that she wanted - needed - someone who couldn't possibly live without her. Yes, it reveals an insecurity on her part, but also I basically said straight to her that I could not and would not fulfil that role. I said something like "well, I don't think I could ever not live without someone..." - she was vulnerable, and I'm completely stable, and so it doesn't quite work. (I just hope to god not all women think how you said they think at least to the extent that my ex did. I hope there are women who are a bit more secure and recognise that I can live my life without them, as much as I might love them.)

Krae, you are so negative....

But he's right. I didn't realise until going back and reading about the various relations that the only one that really does have no problems is duality. Mirror relations are generally okay, but clearly they're not going to be much better than just for friendship (same with activation, both of which I must say make fucking good friendships). The most problematic interquadra relation is clearly identity. Too much competition.

In other words, what should you take from socionics? Two lessons: (1) your best friends (real and potential) - we're talking about the most fulfilling - are going to come from your quadra and (2) your happiest and most successful relationship will be with your dual.

[tiny_dancer]

I just hope to god not all women think how you said they think at least to the extent that my ex did. I hope there are women who are a bit more secure and recognise that I can live my life without them, as much as I might love them.

I think age and experience mellow those anxieties out. (Hopefully)

[Trevor]

Gulenko said somewhere that superego relations are stable only when both parties share the same level of activity, i.e. both active or both passive.

[Ezra]

Ezra I think it's really cool that you tried so hard to do those caregiver tasks. That does show a lot and I'm sure she appreciated that. But, if she is IEE, and insecure, then she probably was looking for indications that you cared about her as much as she cared about you. I agree the "not being able to live w/o" someone does sound unhealthy, but it's also a cry for "please say you care about me a LOT!" That sort of demand would make me uncomfortable too, if you don't feel as invested as she does.

However, that cry for "please let me know you care!" is sort of what IEEs do in varying ways, and the caregivers don't really get pissed off fulfilling that. It is sort of demanding I guess. And it is a lot of work for people who don't enjoy that sort of thing.

I have had guys try to give me what I want, but it's done in kind of a mechanical way and it does make me question if they really care. I had an ENTp try to do all of the caregiver stuff and he exhausted himself basically and had to end it. Back then I didn't even know what a "caregiver" was, but I remember he made me a nice dinner one night and then looked completely depressed and tired. It ended shortly after. It's just really hard to give what you don't want to give.

Ezra, it really does sound like she may be IEE from the description. IEEs are weird because despite being super independent/wanting to do things our own way/being busy, we are also very concerned that people accept us (the ones we are close to) and we are looking for an Fi-connection where we feel safe. The indications that is in place can be caregiver-type actions, and also words, etc. She was looking for indications that Fi-safety net was there so she could relax that your connection was strong, and for whatever reason that wasn't there for her. So even if you carried out those actions, other aspects of that may have been missing that caused her to feel uncared for. Or maybe she was more invested or in love than you were? It's hard to tell.

For whatever reason she could tell that how you were naturally wasn't going to be enough to create that Fi-connection, and she didn't want to instruct you how to do it because she felt it would be too much "work" for you and unnatural and exhausting for you. That's how I interpreted it anyway. And if that's the case, I would just let it go, because she can see incompatibilities down the line (even if you can't see them yet).

Just as a sidenote about caregivers, they really do fit so well w/ IEEs...I had an ISFp ex, and if I was even slightly upset or stressed about something he could sense it, just by my body language (even if I was trying not to show it) and he woudn't let it go until I'd talk about it extensively (which would bore many other types -- would prob bore me as well) and he'd listen to every word and hug me until I felt completely better. Other types (such as ESFps) would listen for a while, but then get bored and expect me to just feel better on my own, which I was OK w/. But I admit that being catered to like that was really nice (and indicates to an IEE that you do care a lot). So it's more than just the tasks, but it's that understanding that the caregiver is there to sort of cater to you when you need help w/ something or feel bad, and the "help" is given w/o resentment or feeling put upon, just totally neutrally.

Thanks for the insight, jewels. I think you're right; the kind of commitment she wanted I just couldn't give. As much as I loved her, and she me, she wanted more of the kind of appreciation to which you refer, and which I simply could not give. Part of it is "manly" in the traditional sense of the term, but I think a significant amount of it has to do with my being a Beta, someone who simply does not value the kind of reassurance she wanted from me. Not only this, but I couldn't even give it.

A further interesting point I just realised was that when we were walking somewhere once, she told me that she'd been talking with her best friend about what I could offer her in terms of a relationship. She told me "I don't think you'd really know what to do, for example, if my grandma died [someone to whom she is very close]". I told her she was absolutely right, with the many Fi PoLR descriptions that I've read in mind as I told her. This would suggest that the kind of comforting which didn't come naturally to me she'd find in a Caregiver, as you point out in your analysis of the SEI.

However, just out of curiosity and similarly related, do you believe an SLI could provide this kind of comfort?

But super-egos just don't work on the long term. Even as friends, it gets boring and awkward. Not enough glue.

I hope this isn't completely true. I want to remain friends with her. I think she's awesome and she thinks the same of me.

On some level, though, I think we could never really be great friends. That is confined to Beta quadra () for me.

Gulenko said somewhere that superego relations are stable only when both parties share the same level of activity, i.e. both active or both passive.

What do active and passive mean in this context?

[tiny_dancer]

However, just out of curiosity and similarly related, do you believe an SLI could provide this kind of comfort?

lol Well, my grandmother DID die, and my SLI boyfriend had nothing to say, not even offering a hug. Which at the time made me think, "Gee. Thanks. Why did I tell you again?"

I think the lack of reaction came across as not giving a damn about ME, which is not necessarily true. It's more like not knowing an appropriate response for the situation.

My ILI father is similarly lost when it comes to emotional things.

[Trevor]

What do active and passive mean in this context?

Tbh, i don't know. I don't feel like investigating the issue at the moment. Here's the link(it's in russian, apparently). the link

[baittoman]

FWIW, I'm often instantly drawn to IEEs. They seem so elegant and in control of their words and how they move people around them, and it's very attractive. Then, I try to be friendly with them and show a bit of myself, and my natural inclination at the time could for example be to make some self-ironic jokes, or somehow show a bad side of me, not sure why, but it feels like a friendly thing to do, and then they'll sooner or later look at me with insecurity and I'll dislike their lack of feedback (thinking of it as judgemental, but maybe it isn't) and then it's end of relation.

I think I sort of know that feeling. When you're with your super-ego, it's like they're really awesome, and somewhat alluring. So you do something to "impress" them, to elicit a reciprocity, but it just seemed like they were kind of turned off by whatever you did. Then you back away, and then they seem to act more friendly, actually doing what you tried to do at first, trying to establish a relationship with this "cool" person. You don't return the favour, they get annoyed again and leave, and then they suddenly seem more interesting again, and you once again approach them.

It's a vicious cycle. Well, something like that.

[tiny_dancer]

FWIW, numbers 2 & 3 were also my "problems" with my dual ex. I'm not entirely sure whether they're type related, though, because I've heard numerous women of all types gripe about their husbands' lack of attention to things that are important to them.

Looking back on the situation, I realized that I was acting in a manner similar to my mother: doing things for other people in order to be needed, and trying to fill a void of disconnection in the relationship, instead of focusing on the real matter, which was whether or not we worked together as regular people and as friends with no strings attached. It was about expectations of what romance and a relationship should be, some of which were unrealistic and unnecessary. I think women tend to appreciate romantic gestures and use it as a gauge to decide how much you care that they're in your life. But they don't like having to tell you those things, because then they feel like you're just placating them and it hasn't arisen from your genuine sentiments.

God, that's a mindfuck

Guys have their own expectations, I suppose, but I can't really speak to what those are.

She said this because, besides the giving aspect, what was happening was that she was trying to change me. She thought that if this continued, eventually it would breed resentment and hostility from me, tiring of her changing me constantly. We agreed that while at the moment I could change some of the things about me, in the long run, I'd begin to hate her complaining.

This actually sounds the most like an IEE statement. I've actually said that to some of my exes. The rest of it seems more male / female, though obviously generalized a bit.

[jughead]

Jonathon Ross hits the Ti polr.

A full interview:
Pt1
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sourc...d9-cRQ&cad=rja
Pt2
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sourc...qIpBtQ&cad=rja

[squirreltual]

Are the days really always numbered as far as socionics is concerned?

How much can this be assuaged by common interests, tolerance and healthy self esteem/independence/blahblah?

Anecdotes welcome.

[redbaron]

Well... I believe that one of my best friends from college is married to her superego. He is ISTj and she is INFj. They have big arguments. They hash out a lot of things, and both are stubborn. But, they do share the same religious/moral values and worldview, had a very old-fashioned courtship which both found romantic, and they truly love each other. It's not easy, it's not a walk in the park, but they each have their own careers, they're both realists, and they make it work. It's a "nose to the grindstone" marriage, if you will. (and I'm not saying that's bad, it's just a particular kind of marriage)

[Darkworker]

Are the days really always numbered as far as socionics is concerned?

How much can this be assuaged by common interests, tolerance and healthy self esteem/independence/blahblah?

Anecdotes welcome.

Yes, if you practice tolerance, have high self-esteem etc... You are going to get along. But it will never be a fulfilling relationship. You are missing out so much by being in that relationship compared to being in a relationship with your dual.
It's holding you back. When you are in a relationship with your dual, you are free to actualize your Ego block. In a relationship with superego, the partner is not supportive of your ego block, and constantly irritates you with irrevelant information coming from their ego block(your superego), and therefore holding you back in life.

[krieger]

made a thread about it earlier:
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...rounded-couple

there may well be strong advantages to this relation that aren't often recognized. it is a balancing relation both in the area of strengths and in that of values, thus potentially leading to the broadest extent of personal growth under one's partner's influence, while still being relatively viable in contrast to the Conflict relation.

of course the many downsides are well known and need little further emphasis.

[ashlesha]

i love LIIs, i think. granted i pretty much just know the internet ones except for my dad.
(and people i've described my dad to say he doesn't sound LII. but hitta reminds me of him.)

if i put any faith in socionics to predict relationships it would make me sad.

i remember descriptions saying something about respecting their strengths? but it feels less formal than just that.

[Absurd]

Providing intertype relations were written by Alpha NTs (LII/ILE), it looks like they didn't know what were they doing nor did.

[ashlesha]

(it would be cool to hear about esi-lii specifically but that would probably get even less replies than this played out question)

[krieger]

i feel a need to keep a distance from most esi, but there are notable exception. i find that relations with them get "intimate" quickly in a way that is not comfortable nor longer term rewarding without a lot of frustration. but like i said, exceptions...

picture yourself having a person near you that you feel similar to but this person has the tendency to, every time you think of something awkward that you would preferably hide, draw attention to exactly that thing. that is typically my experience with superego. there is relief from having the "thing" spelled out, and a certain intimacy arising from the "mind reader effect" but also frustration. it can help you develop a side to you you're avoiding to staying your comfort zone, but the development comes at a price... bah

ps. i did write a thread once about how superego can theoretically be viewed as the best relation from a self-development point of view and i still support much of the conclusions in that thread....

[mu4]

Superegos generally like each other, especially early on, same temperament, similar thinking styles, what's not to like.

One of those things I've found very interesting is that temperament conflicts are much more visible than information preference conflicts. I have tons of problems with Ij's of all sorts regardless of quadra, while I have very little problem initially with Ip's and Ep's. The rationality and irrationality divide is very prominent in intertype relations. There are no really good conflicting temperament relations. They are supervision, conflict and mirror.

[Absurd]

Superegos generally like each other, especially early on, same temperament, similar thinking styles, what's not to like.

What is generally?

I hope you're aware you're going against the "Socionics canon" you preach for, you smart person (lul).

Superego is akin to conflict.

[mu4]

What is generally?

I hope you're aware you're going against the "Socionics canon" you preach for, you smart person (lul).

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...rego-relations

[Absurd]

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...rego-relations

Cool emoticon, I want one as well, not.

Conflict:

Partners notice the slightest flaws in each other and often exaggerate them. They often argue, disagree, don't listen to one another, don't accept each other's arguments. Even jokes and compliments are perceived incorrectly. All of this does not contribute to development of sensitivity, mutual attention to the needs and interests of another. Over time, the tension that originates in exacerbating conflicts and constant desire to move away, causes resentment.

Superego:

However, at closer distances these relations develop into rivalry between the partners. Each one tries to impress the other, to show him his own importance or priority in some area. Difficulties in understanding lead to loss of trust and warm feelings for each other as well as hope that at some point you will be understood correctly. Partners are thus forced to try to readjust to one another, to constantly seek common ground, but the balance in these relations is achieved only for a short period of time. Partners react to each other very sharply and overly emotionally and can unintentionally cause each other pain

Now go back your cave, intellectual ILE (lul).

Plus

Add

Ej

Temperament

To your list

Of not gettting fine with

Alongside Ij.

[glam]

i think it's true you can like/admire your super-ego - as long as you keep a safe distance from them. imo you can't really be very close to your super-ego and gain much benefit from it.

i've had a good amount of experience with many SLIs (family and friendship-wise), and i've found that when trying to close the psychological/emotional distance, it generally turns very ugly, very quickly. also it is difficult to constructively work together and solve problems. both perceive the other as not being very helpful - even a hindrance. it can get to the point where every little thing they say seems pointless and unhelpful, which are met with dismissive comments by the other. eventually there is also the added stress of feeling like you are being "watched" in their presence (even when not directly communicating with them), due to the acquired experience of previous conflicts. you are "on guard", weary of conflicting with them, which requires you to be silent and/or act unlike yourself - which is generally unsustainable. thus when you begin acting like yourself again around them, more conflict ensues.

it can be a very painful if those involved try to "push" the relationship. in my experience it's best to keep your distance, maintain your own territory (i.e. don't live in close quarters with them, unless you can spend time a lot of time away from each other), keep communication civil and on the superficial side. bonding can be achieved by talking about things of mutual interest that you have similar opinions on - where you won't end up disagreeing too much.

i most recently experienced super-ego relation conflict when traveling in a small group that included an SLI; we clashed a lot over a lot of things large and small, and it was the LII in our group who acted as the "bridge" between us. without the LII being able to communicate relatively well with both of us (being my beneficiary and the SLI's benefactor), it would have been worse than it was. i found it interesting that the LII foresaw the clashing between myself and the SLI before it really started - and the LII knows nothing of socionics.

[InvisibleJim]

My superego partners are utterly banal. As soon as I see where that is going, I avoid them.

[Narc]

I find ESEs quite irritating more often than not.

[Esaman]

With normal dependence on intelligence and culture I find ESI enticing. Particularly the seriousness, the tangibility of perception, the bit of bleeding heart/romanticism, the reservation. There is enough similarity or whatever to enjoy a very different perspective vicariously. Communication and particularly trying to agree on something on other hand is likely to lead to more bad blood than it is worth. Courteous distance I think is the optimal one.

[Beautiful sky]

I don't really care for LSI in intimate relationships; they are nice people and would make wonderful friends, but the whole thing about being smug, self assuring, seeking emotionally varied environments and not being sentimental and feminine, sensitive, sentimental like as my duals are would drive me nuts (there's not much emotion to read in them, whereas my duals have such varied internal emotionality that shows through on their faces that I just want to reach out and make out with them <3); LSI just want you to create an emotional environment for them, and I'm not apt at doing that. They are also not as aggressive as my duals in bed :/ But they are fun and I wouldn't mind taking up on their adventurous nature and go do things with them.