From reading her posts in this topic, it is very obvious to me that Jessica is a woman.
From reading her posts in this topic, it is very obvious to me that Jessica is a woman.
I see a pattern in jessica's thinking and posting.
She decided she's SLI, then starts to read some random other type description and she finds something that relates to her. She immediately starts doubting her SLI typing.
Then we comfort her in telling, no it's still possible to be SLI and she agrees.
Then she reads about an other random type description and... etc etc
Yeah I like that idea.Originally Posted by jessica129
You're both missing the point of the OP.
She's explicitly stated that aggressor relations AS A WHOLE make sense to her. Also, THE NEED FOR OBVIOUS EXTERNAL EMOTIONAL EXPRESSION is not something an SLI has. In fact they don't like it at all.
I once dated an SLI girl, who said, love doesn't go through the mind. I think females in general want some emotions in a relationship.
I dunno though. Overall, I prefer a calm logical man who appreciates the emotions *I* bring to the relationship.
IEI-Fe 4w3
Surely you can bring other assests.
ISTp
SLI
Enneagram 5 with a side of wings.
absolutely.
IEI-Fe 4w3
I wouldn't be convinced of her being beta if she said she knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that everything she quoted was what she preferred. The fact is that Delta irrational duality is actually quite passionate inside and out. Frankly, I find that highly non-indicative of type considering that it is the common conception of romance and passion which is something that many people think they want even if they don't by nature.
It takes more than that, but like I said, if you're typing based on other inputs, then I have no place to say anything because I haven't given any thought to her type other than the op.
Are you a fucking retard?
An emotionless relationship would be unhealthy. Everyone would agree with that.
Reread my post and if you still have issues then... don't talk to me. I'm not interested.
Please explain how.
This is well-said, and to be honest, what I've noticed in my delta (ENFp) step-brothers' relationships vs. my own .
Jarno is right--there are many people who are emotional without having Fe in the ego block, including my step-brother... He's very sensitive and emotional.
I know Fe polrs who are "emotional"--I think that people here forget that they're people, with joys and disappointments as well.
In terms of emotions, some differences between my ENFp step-brother and I are in the way we emphasize and express them...
Like silverchris9 said above (very well, IMO) is that betas come across as (comparatively--and generally speaking, in terms of emotions,) dramatic... Beta NFs express feelings outwardly and intensely--beta STs respond positively to it.
In my experience, that's what Fe (and fe valuing) is.
My ENFp step-brother is much more low-key in his expressions of emotion... He's not intense in expressing his passions, whereas I am... He's clearly a XXFx--no one would mistake him for a XXTx--but it's as though those feelings stay inside, and only come out in (what I perceive as) thoughtful gestures... For example, he gets a nice card on someone's birthday, a movie when he's on his way home... He smiles politely, etc.
From what I can tell, he gets upset if someone 'breaks a rule,' (an unspoken rule.) This is Fi, to me... It's internal and it doesn't need to be discussed. I love you isn't said frequently (by my standards.)
This is where I clash with females. They want to be emo and, they want me to be a 'strong manly rock.' However I want to be emo. And I am emo. =/ It's kinda where the gayness emotionality clashes with the straight female-ness and there's this sort of raging deep-seated hatred we have for each other. I dunno it's interesting. I seem to be instinctively turned off of the scent female hormones, biologically.
I have never ever saw a female be sexually attracted to a man that was sensitive in the way that I am, although I have been able to attract gay men. So I guess it's biological or something. I have met one girl that was into me faux-sexually, but of course it was 'my heart' or something gay like that. Even if I could fathom the idea of heterosexuality around my head, Idk fucking girls feels weird and awkward to me. But I like to think about it a lot because I'm weird and like to imagine 'what if scenerios.'
Not saying that all women like 'bad boys' or something cause that's not true just....they don't like my sort of emo romance-ness, im too gay for them. I think I will try to be straight though just to see how far I can go. =D
This contradicts what I've read and seen about Fi/Te relationships becoming outwardly dispassionate overtime.
passion - A powerful emotion, such as love, joy, hatred, or anger.
<Crispy> what subt doesnt understand is that a healthy reaction to "FUCK YOU" isand not
This is off-topic, but I wanted to respond to this...
Something I've noticed as I've gotten to 27 is that those ppl you call "bad boys" seem to be getting fewer and uglier girls these days...
It's like someone flicked a light-switch, and suddenly it's not cool to be without a college degree or a future... I think that "bad boy" works until you're about 24 or maybe 25 if you push it... After that, it's an entirely different game...
The elite girls suddenly have a different conception of the guys they consider elite... And the bad boys are left behind with scraps... Increasingly unfortunate in circumstance.
The emo kids who were languishing suddenly get a lot of attention.
In other words, B&D, you've got a few years and then you can go hetero with abandon.. Maybe in the meantime you can go to one of those religious camps to pray the gay away.And who knows, maybe the gay will go away... Maybe it will...
I think that the truth of this matter lies between what Azeroffs is saying and what some betas here are saying...
In my experience: Fe manifests in outward emotional displays, Fi manifests in (comparatively) small considerate emotional gestures.
Fi relationships are not--generally speaking--as ostentatiously passionate, intense, and dramatic as Fe relationships.
For example, ENFj-ISTj relationships vs. ENFp-ISTp relationships--the latter are not what I'd call outwardly passionate, intense, and dramatic, although there are certainly emotions there... It's nuts to say that there aren't... And it's also untrue...
The ENFj-ISTj relationship is outwardly emotional--it requires quarrels for catharsis..! This is what I mean by ostentatious and dramatic...
Fi valuers say "I love you" and kiss each other, etc... It's nuts to suggest that there's not these outward displays of emotions in Fi valuing relationships... It's also nuts to suggest that there is no "drama" in Fi relationships... They fight too, have torrid affairs, etc.
This is what's true in my experience: in Fi relationships, it's VERY RARE to hear anyone going on and on--at great lengths verbally, or in writing--about their passions, the intensity of their feelings, or anything like that... VERY RARE... Because the feelings are, for the most part, internally understood. (That's Fi.)
This is not to say that Fi valuers don't adore each other outwardly... It's just that, compared with Fe valuers, it doesn't look like as much. Indeed, Fi emotions are--in my experience--much more understated and (non-verbally) understood.
I'm only a tiny bit younger than you. =p I'm 26.
And yeah I think people might have some misconceptions when I talk about this stuff:
1. that im insecure, hate being gay
Actually I can't think of anything more than just one lol. But it is not that.
I'm just a curious person that's all. It would be sort of interesting to me to see how straight I could be but I do worry about driving myself crazy. I remember at Starr once this black guy tried to get me to talk to a girl in walmart but I was all ehhhh. (I wouldn't talk to a cute boy in walmart either though of course, =p)
yeah I agree with you juju, my problem with this thread is there's a bunch of people coming in here trying to bend to theory to make SLI fit for her, instead of looking at her actions and what shes actually saying.
A relationship is felt to be "lacking" if not accompanied by intense demonstrations of emotions.
intense =
a. Possessing or displaying a distinctive feature to an extreme degree
b. Very severe; violent
c. occurring or existing in a high degree; very strong; violent
in what way does is this prelavent in delta? you can bend conceptions to heck and back, but bottom line is this isnt a part of delta. delta is about subduing and subdued emotions. no delta I know feels like a relationship is 'lacking' because of this, they appreciate the atmosphere a lack of it creates.
<Crispy> what subt doesnt understand is that a healthy reaction to "FUCK YOU" is
Hmm.. ^good point.
This has me wondering how the gamma qaudrant acts when in relationships..Anyone have a clue? More delta-ish as well?
I didn't realize that liking the dramatic/intense parts of relationships was solely beta...
I get bored easily without intensity/yelling/crying/passion..could be an age thing though.
IEEs are highly emotional, and SLIs are highly sensual. They aren't passionate in the beta sense, but to call this pair dispassionate is incorrect.
This mostly applies to rationals. It doesn't apply as heavily to irrationals because xEEs are actually quite emotional naturally. Also, all relationships become somewhat less passionate over time, so that's not a very fair statement.
What I see is everyone jumping to conclusions based on insufficient data. SLIs are actually quite passionate though not in so much in a dramatic way. SLIs are still very sensual and emotional. Being passionate and requiring emotional intensity in relationships is not exclusive to beta. Betas do have certain kind of emotionality that distinguishes them, but there's more too it than 'passion' or 'emotional intensity.'
obviously passion isn't just beta related, there was a reason I italicized outwardly as passion is expressed differently within every quadra. your missing keywords and its fucking up your interpretation.
also, did you skip over where I posted the definition of intense? for you to tell me that fits as a characterization of deltas is really offbase to me. to that end, I want you to give me a confirmed delta here who personifies that intensity definition.
sidenote: deltas to me come off as having a lack of depth in their emotionality in general, not because they are not capable, but because it correlates with their values and the peaceful atmosphere they like to promote.
Look, I can even accept that delta may like intense moments from time to time.
JESSICA129 described wanting it in the course of an entire relationship, as a steady dynamic; not one that pops up here and there. You seem like your either skipping my posts or we have a misunderstanding because this seems pretty clear cut to me.
Another problem Im seeing is that all the promoters for her as delta are taking her posts soley and not in the context of her entire time here as it should be. If you don't care enough to do that, I don't see why you would even post.
<Crispy> what subt doesnt understand is that a healthy reaction to "FUCK YOU" is
Well, I've been reading up and think I am slightly more knowledgeable about socionics but a few things are confusing me. Like thepirate said, if given a choice between a constant flow of outward emotional expression or a few random few and far between expressions of emotions, I'd choose a constant flow...no doubt. As me and him discussed in private, as Fe is a SLI's polr, the lack of shouldn't even be something that would be bothering them enough to put such thought into, am I right. Overall, beta seems more of a good fit but I do not feel as though I'd ever conflict with an IEE or that, as much as I enjoy them, that an IEI is my dual...so nothing is making sense to me and I'm confused as all hell and it's annoying. SLI has felt about 95% right but I could never, ever identify with their passiveness and certain lack of intensity in everything. Damnit.
SLE-Ti could work. You do seem "irrational" in the most Socionically stereotypical sense. You may think you're not "outgoing" enough or whatever, but Ti sub SLEs can be very contained, some even very reserved; my friend Chris is an IEI-Fe and his girlfriend is SLE-Ti, and he is the one who does most of the talking, has to sort of draw her out, make her feel comfortable/less anxious in certain situatins...SLEs are stereotypically assumed to be all outgoing and aggressive and shit, and while there may be some correlation there, it certainly doesn't apply broad spectrum.
Also enneatype and instinct stacking come into play here, and from what I've seen of you jess I would say you could easily be sp/sx or sx/sp, which are the two most reserved stackings, generally speaking. You're a 6w7, right?
Ask any IEE here if they have intense outward emotionality.intense =
a. Possessing or displaying a distinctive feature to an extreme degree
b. Very severe; violent
c. occurring or existing in a high degree; very strong; violent
I assure you, I didn't skip over anything.sidenote: deltas to me come off as having a lack of depth in their emotionality in general, not because they are not capable, but because it correlates with their values and the peaceful atmosphere they like to promote.
Look, I can even accept that delta may like intense moments from time to time.
JESSICA129 described wanting it in the course of an entire relationship, as a steady dynamic; not one that pops up here and there. You seem like your either skipping my posts or we have a misunderstanding because this seems pretty clear cut to me.
I'm not promoting delta as much as I'm opposing a hasty typing. All I'm trying to say is that this is not enough to indicate type. I don't need to take other posts into consideration to make this assertion. I have made my position clear in my other posts. Jessica129 may or may not be delta or beta; that is irrelevant.Another problem Im seeing is that all the promoters for her as delta are taking her posts soley and not in the context of her entire time here as it should be. If you don't care enough to do that, I don't see why you would even post.
I think this is a very real possibility and probobly the most accurate thus far. I think this is probobly at the root of all my confusion...it's all making a ton more sense now. Mbti has polluted my brain.
I'm not knowledgable enough to comment on enneagram but 6w7 was what I had originally thought of myself as.
Delta is just way too sterile for you...I mean, not all Deltas are sterile, but...I mean, come onI will fucking never forget that.
why would I ask them? my disagreement is with you, I want to see what your seeing because it isn't matching up with what I see. I want your opinion.
also the promoting delta thing wasn't aimed at you really, it was just a general point about the overall posters in this thread.
& you don't need to look at her history sure, but know that it makes your point misinformed and its partly the reason why there's this disagreement between us.
<Crispy> what subt doesnt understand is that a healthy reaction to "FUCK YOU" is
Even if IEEs can be overtly "emotional," the point is that jessica finds something LACKING in a relationship without that overt emotionality; this is the opposite of SLIs, who tend to be wary of extreme emotional displays, and feel like people are manipulating them when they do such things. Read the descriptions: SLIs DEFINITELY do NOT actively seek an overtly turbulent or emotional partner.
my point is that IEEs (delta) have an outward intense emotionality.
If I'm just focusing on one aspect of a theory, I don't need to know everything or even anything about a particular person in order to talk about it.& you don't need to look at her history sure, but know that it makes your point misinformed and its partly the reason why there's this disagreement between us.how do you ever expect to type accurately if your just going to take bits and pieces of a person?
The problem I think I'm seeing is that Jessica is not sure of the feelings her SO has for her. In order for feelings to be known, they have to be expressed one way or another. If IEEs are naturally quite expressive, then something about that expressiveness is needed by SLI. That expression of emotion may just be a means to an Fi end. Maybe that's what Fe PoLRs need. Fe PoLRs can be quite presumptuous of Fi-bonds partly because of their weak ability to read Fe signals. With Fi-creatives, their Fe demonstrative is always in sync with their Fi. This would make Fe-PoLRs correct in their assumptions when it comes to Fi-creatives.
But SLIs are not receptive to Fe in terms of receiving active emotional signals from a partner about the state of the relationship; they do not expect emotions to necessarily convey the state of the relationship. They are more comfortable operating under assumptions about the state of the relationship that are conveyed to them by the following of implicitly determined rules that define the relationship: doing certain things for each other, filling particular roles in each other's lives, etc.
"Oh look, he fucking socked that guy. Must be SLE."
...is the kind of shit that this approach devolves into, and, despite being an extreme example, accurately conveys the relative efficacy of such methods.
Yeah, I wouldn't think that they need a constant flow of emotional signals. I think I can agree with that, but I think that it should be pointed out that Fe-demonstrative will likely give a constant flow of emotional signals.
Exactly my point. I'm saying that this one aspect is not enough to type.
I know what your point is, the reason why I want you to name one is because I have yet to even think of one IEE who comes across this way on forums, video, or in real life.
as far as this conversation goes, your right, our focus is different. mine is on getting to jessica's correct type, and yours is on talking about theory. since that is what your concentrating on, I don't know why your arguing with me. this thread isn't about discussing theory, its about theory as it pertains to jessica and as such looking at her history would help abit, don't you agree?
fe demonstrative compared to creative is still vastly different to me. as far as Im concerned there are only superficial similarities between Fe use in types such as ENFp ESFp vs INFp ISFp. The 'intensity' and steady dynamic of one vs the other is incomparable.
I think we pretty much all agree that expressiveness and emotion is needed in every relationship, what this disagreement is really about is the degree to which each is needed and jessica has clearly stated an Fe preference over those of an Fi valuing type
<Crispy> what subt doesnt understand is that a healthy reaction to "FUCK YOU" is
I'm not so sure you could recognize it on the forums since their conscious intention isn't to express emotion, but I know one very personally, and she is very outwardly emotional. I can say the same of SEEs I know.
well, I am focusing on the theory as it pertains to jessica. Solving a micro problem is just as important as directly aiming for the macro problem. This micro problem just happens to be the reason why this thread was created.as far as this conversation goes, your right, our focus is different. mine is on getting to jessica's correct type, and yours is on talking about theory. since that is what your concentrating on, I don't know why your arguing with me. this thread isn't about discussing theory, its about theory as it pertains to jessica and as such looking at her history would help abit, don't you agree?
I agree. There is definitely a difference, but the difference is easier observed than described, and how can we be sure of which one jessica prefers?fe demonstrative compared to creative is still vastly different to me. as far as Im concerned there are only superficial similarities between Fe use in types such as ENFp ESFp vs INFp ISFp. The 'intensity' and steady dynamic of one vs the other is incomparable.
The bold is the part I'm not so sure about. If this was certain, then we would have nothing to argue over.I think we pretty much all agree that expressiveness and emotion is needed in every relationship, what this disagreement is really about is the degree to which each is needed and jessica has clearly stated an Fe preference over those of an Fi valuing type
+
= she needs a constant flow of intense emotional expression, this might as well be the definition for Fe preference. what more does she need to say to make this clear?
<Crispy> what subt doesnt understand is that a healthy reaction to "FUCK YOU" is
maybe Fe demonstrative acts in support of Fi and so only reaffirms the Fi bond, where as Fe in the ego block makes that bond increasingly unclear to those with Fi in the super-id such that they're not sure of anything in the relationship anymore (Fe distorting Fi) ?
Of course then what one would be wanting is some kind of at least verbal affirmation of the bond or relationship status, not emotional demonstrations that allude to it.
But it just all depends on what 'intense demonstrations of emotion' means to her and even on the type of whoever she is with (because if they are an LIE or an LSI or some type that is generally not so emotional inside or out, then as she is herself a logical type this would only lead to making things unclear). And some people are of course more emotional than others, regardless of type.
(I think these things often boil down to a "well it all depends..." lack of conclusion to me, with things mentioned on the forum)
Well, here are my answers to some of these questions, I'm not sure if it'll help any..
Makes me feel...alive...cared for...that I matter...that I can affect someone.
Someone who isn't afraid to openly express how they feel about you. Excitement. Passion.Describe what 'emotional intensity' means to you.
At the right time and place and with the right person, I can respond the same way. I might be a little shy about it but if it needs to be said, I'll say it...?How do you respond to emotional intensity?
There always feels like something is lacking. Feels like there's no passion...no point. What is the point? Look, my deal is this...if I don't affect you enough to the point you treat my like any other person off the street or maintain the same exact emotional state all the damn time, i've done something wrong or you're just not into me and it's time to move on.What is wrong with the absence of emotional intensity?
Some times it's annoying but I think you need to if you want it to be serious. I don't need someone to constantly be telling me how much they love me and I'd get really irritated if someone did that, but they need to tell me.How do you feel about talking over the status of relationships?
Aye, this is what I want from you babes, ie, they're the emotional ones, and that the emotions they bring are enough for 2.
I remember dating a girl before who was on about all this, "how do you feel Cyclops", "you never talk about yourself - your feelings" etc, and I was like to myself, "fuck off, why's that my job".
She was an ENTj incidentally.
@jessica i'll keep my eye on your sig, it's a lot of work reading through ALL the posts in the last few stages atm...
try to meet another SLI and see how you would describe them. Maybe you see that you have the wrong / exaggarated idea of passiveness and lack of intensity. That's the main problem with descriptions, they can be multi interpretable.
It's irrelevant, though.
"Shit, the house is on fire! Call the fire department!"
"But why not call the aquarium?"
"WHAT THE FUCK?"
"THEY HAVE LOTS OF WATER TOO, DUH"
...ok, but you should take it into account with everything else about the person. Considering it in isolation is no worse than ignoring something extremely relevant.Exactly my point. I'm saying that this one aspect is not enough to type.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
