Discussion of INFp/IEI stereotypes: can you relate?

[Sirena]

Although some of these things irritate me, I tend to not take them very literally. I tend to focus on a more general message behind it, the underlying feel. Which is why reading something like "IEIs are the slaves, never the masters" doesn't really bother me. I see it as a given that there are always exceptions because just in general, I always see things as "more complicated than that". That's probably why I would have a hard time deciding whether I'm more submissive or more controlling, for instance. Honestly, I'm both. It's just such a complicated dynamic the way I see it in my head. That's why I like the victim description that mentions how victims can be aggressive and come off looking like aggressors at times, but that deep down they are testing people to find the person worthy to submit to. That's how I see myself. I certainly don't walk around turning over on my back submitting to everyone. I can be quite rebellious, actually...usually out of a feeling of "who the fuck are you to try to control me". My instinct is usually to rebel until maybe the right person comes along and puts me in my place or something.

So what I'm saying is that most of those statements are poorly worded, yes. But personally that doesn't bother me so much because I seem to automatically translate what I read into "abstract wordless idea" in my mind. I get that the essence of the statement within its context is that IEIs ultimately want someone who is worthy of their respect and admiration. Worthy enough to listen to and let take charge of those things we suck at. Someone who will protect us from the outside world, while we protect them from their internal worlds (). I don't automatically take it as being a doormat and spending every minute of the day worshipping someone. But I can relate to the power dynamic illustrated. It makes us feel grounded and allows us to relax. It's reminiscent of what some IEIs on here have said about loving how SLEs will take charge and just do something for them, without even asking if it's okay or if there's a preference.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Good post Sirena. That's how I see it too.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

I continue to slip away from people forever and ever and ever.

That's a very IEI trait. Well another stereotype, but it's true more than not. =D

I get what you're saying but it's like , remember- this is all malleable. It all can be argued with. Until somebody proves without a matter of a doubt that socionics is THE typology, using very advanced scientific formulae comes along, then perceptions and stereotypes is pretty much all we got.

Believe me you can drive yourself crazy with this shit. =/

You have to admit it's a lot more advanced, complex and intricate than MBTI though.

[Sirena]

Good post Sirena. That's how I see it too.

cool, thanks!

That is the way I used to think also, and B&Ds statement about stereotypes (projections) being necessary is true as well. However, the stereotypes also make it near impossible to accurately type people... I am not here so much to understand myself (I don't feel Socionics help much with that, to be honest), I'm here more to understand the intertype relations, but then I need to be able to type people. I am IEI, yet people question my type because I don't fit the stereotypical box. That's just ONE example of how Socionics is hard to use in reality - BECAUSE of the stereotypes. That's why I'd love to break some of them.

I get what you mean and stupidly simplistic statements like "all IEIs have weird haircuts" are well, stupid. I'd say my haircut is pretty much within the normal range, lol. So, I think things like that are dangerous in as far as people take it literally, which some obviously do. I just take it to mean that we tend to want to stand out in some unique, yet subtle way. I'm uncomfortable with a lot of attention and I am self-conscious so I would probably never be bold enough to make some sort of fashion statement. The way I express this is rather by wearing clothes with subtle but unique details or adding a detail to my outfit with jewelry or something.

It's also difficult for me to know where to draw the line between stereotype and accuracy when trying to type someone. I question myself all the time for the same reason. I wish there was a simple and concrete answer to "what makes someone a certain type", therefore being able to more accurately know what to chuck up to individual differences. Seriously, that's a huge problem for me when typing people. Plus I never feel I'm being objective. Eh, people are complex though, which is what makes this fun in the first place. I see my sucking at this more as my own inability to make those logical connections, since my mind just continues to speculate endlessly.

Yes, I like the Victim description too, but I would never "submit" to anyone. I continue to slip away from people forever and ever and ever. I refuse to be "controlled" - there's always an inner attitude that it is my choice for the moment to be with someone - and the partner will have to prove himself worthy again and again and again. I'm not controllable. I'm not submissive. Unless I chose to be. My ex SLE said I behaved like air - slipping through his fingers every time he thought he "had" me.

I have to say this doesn't resonate much with me, but it's hard to say whether that's type-related or not. I mean, I agree with some of this. It's not like it's the opposite of who I am, but the overall feel of it doesn't resonate. For one, I see myself as more irrational (in the common sense of the word) than that. I don't think I have nor would I want to have the kind of control you speak of. I'll think about this and try to explain myself better later.

[Sirena]

To explain - what I described is about my instinctual behavior, not something I do "on purpose". It's certainly not something I do to control anyone.

Not sure if this is type related neither, it's probably rather related to erotic attitudes? Our differences could be experience based, age related or even, in Socionics terms - victim subtype based (arrogant/aggressive vs. submissive victim)? I guess B&D is the aggressive victim, dinki might also be one, and I most certainly am. Perhaps your behavior is consistent with the submissive victim?? I don't really understand the submissive victim, so others should answer this.

Anyways, here's from Gulenko's victim description, talking about the differences between the submissive and the aggressive victim:

I know you don't do it on purpose! What I didn't relate to was the consistency of behavior you described. I feel like I'm less consistent than that, or more emotionally unbalanced maybe, lol. My mood fluctuates so much that sometimes I'm perfectly happy "being there" even if they "have me", while other times I react to every little thing. So, I can't say that when I feel they have me, I get an instinctual urge to fly off because that's not always the case. Maybe that's what you mean though? We keep them guessing! I'm probably reading too much into it and we're both trying to illustrate the same thing lol.

I don't understand the submissive victim as described here, but maybe it's being explained too simplistically. Anyway, I definitely relate more to the aggressive victim description, which is what I alluded to in my first post. Most of the time I feel so damn reactive, especially during the beginning stages of trying to get to know someone. It's like I'm unconsciously testing their reaction to my emotional peaks and valleys, maybe in order to see if they're going to be capable/willing to protect me and stand up for me later. And let me tell you, 99% of people can't/aren't willing to handle it, unfortunately. Like someone said earlier (dinki?), I love the princess and dragon slaying stuff! So romantic!!

[redbaron]

I wonder if some of this is how we're perceived by others rather than how we are perceiving the situation ourselves. For me, I'm more of a submissive all the time person on the inside because I know how I feel and how I think about said SLE (ok and I'm not talking about romance here but I do think it applies). But I think from his perspective, he can't pin me down. He doesn't know what's going on in my head so he feels like he has to keep DOING stuff to see where I stand. Prodding me, poking, etc. That might feel to him like I'm ethereal, slipping through his fingers when from my perspective I know that he's pretty much got me. (metaphorically speaking in this instance, heheh)

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

People who have an issue with us IEIs are more than welcome to say it to my face.... with my big hunky burly SLE standing right next to me, of course. =D

[sigma]

People who have an issue with us IEIs are more than welcome to say it to my face.... with my big hunky burly SLE standing right next to me, of course. =D

People who have issues with me are more than welcome to say it to my face. With or without a SLE by my side. I can take it!

[07490]

From socioniko.net
Quote:
But do not overestimate duality! This is a model of relations for dealing with everyday problems. As you get used to your dual, you will begin to want something more, namely social significance of your personality, certain challenges and deviations from everyday activities. This cannot be achieved within dual relationships. And finally, do not forget that no one dual pair is omnipotent – on the contrary, it is strong only within certain fields of activity, where the dual's strong traits complement each other.

On the other hand, it is very difficult to achieve social recognition without the support of your dual. In general, dualization is vitally necessary in two cases: first, in unfavorable social situations when your survival is at stake, and second, when you move upwards along the social hierarchy in which the competition is acute, i.e. for your career.

I think this is true, I have never lived with my duals before, and I can see my dominant functions getting really out of hand, or I might try to "self dualized" in a sense i engaged in activity that is Ti related. I can see that many people who have a closed one that they live with whose their dual are more confident in their own ego function, more develop and not really afraid to show their strong side without a fear of rejection. I have also noticed that people who lived with supervision partner is THE WORSE out of all relationship, even if a person is healthy in his very own way, a big degree of how you interact daily with people you are close with and keep in contact regularly will influence how you looks at social situation.

[JuJu]

From socioniko.net

I've lived with my dual... The only problem with that relationship was that it was claustrophobic. We only really wanted to spend time around each other--we didn't go out much.

That said, I don't know if that's peculiar to that relationship, EIE-LSI, or if it's something that applies to SLE-IEI as well.

[betterthan]

IEIS WOULD NEVER MARRY FOR MONEY.



Who even wrote that lol?! We are materialistic little bitches, yes. But then we have all that romantic idealistic shit mixed in there too.

[sigma]

IEIS WOULD NEVER MARRY FOR MONEY.

Nonsense!
I would marry for money in a heartbeat! Provided, of course, that the woman is a highly attractive intelligent SLE who enjoys being around me.

[betterthan]

Nonsense!
I would marry for money in a heartbeat! Provided, of course, that the woman is a highly attractive intelligent SLE who enjoys being around me.

I like your picture btw, it's very you :tongue:

[betterthan]

[QUOTE=Mimosa Pudica;506979]That is the way I used to think also, and B&Ds statement about stereotypes (projections) being necessary is true as well. However, the stereotypes also make it near impossible to accurately type people... I am not here so much to understand myself (I don't feel Socionics help much with that, to be honest), I'm here more to understand the intertype relations, but then I need to be able to type people. I am IEI, yet people question my type because I don't fit the stereotypical box. That's just ONE example of how Socionics is hard to use in reality - BECAUSE of the stereotypes. That's why I'd love to break some of them.



Yes, I like the Victim description too, but I would never "submit" to anyone. I continue to slip away from people forever and ever and ever. I refuse to be "controlled" - there's always an inner attitude that it is my choice for the moment to be with someone - and the partner will have to prove himself worthy again and again and again. I'm not controllable. I'm not submissive. Unless I chose to be. My ex SLE said I behaved like air - slipping through his fingers every time he thought he "had" me.[/QUOTE]

Yes, I agree. They have to constantly work for it, they need to prove themselves over and over again. They can win me into submission, but not for long - they always have to keep fighting for it.