Romancing styles for Delta dual pairs - do you relate?

[ladyinred]

Pseudo-Caregivers/Students: ENFp, INFj
These are types who exhibit paternal/maternal tendencies towards others in their everyday lives and may thus carry over these notions and temperaments into their romantic life. These types habitually attempt to give their partner what he/she "needs" (or what they believe they need). As a result, they may become drained by lack of attendence to their own needs and desires. In a partner, they are searching for a combination of strength and gentleness.

Teachers: ESTj, ISTp
If I were to describe this type's approach to love, it would be "serious." He approaches his love interest almost with the intention to "teach." This can quite possibly rub the object of his affection in the wrong way, possibly interpreted as condescension. Like the childlike type, he may tend to live "outside sexuality" and may have to intellectualize it in order to be comfortable. He is looking for a worthy pupil.

[Lobo]

I can definitely see the teacher with ESTj/ISTp, and also how it does feel like condescension on the receiving end, hehe. However, I'm not sure about the INFj/ENFp one for me... Makes it sound like someone who just doesn't care about himself enough.

[Absurd]

Yes.

[Minde]

Yes, I've seen this somewhat. In fact, some examples immediately jumped to mind. That's not to say it's like that all the time everywhere for either type. But they can be tendencies.

[UDP]

Pseudo-Caregivers/Students: ENFp, INFj
These are types who exhibit paternal/maternal tendencies towards others in their everyday lives and may thus carry over these notions and temperaments into their romantic life. These types habitually attempt to give their partner what he/she "needs" (or what they believe they need). As a result, they may become drained by lack of attendence to their own needs and desires. In a partner, they are searching for a combination of strength and gentleness.

Ohhh yeah.

I know a lot of NFs who seem to prefer the role of "helper" or "care-giver". sometimes they don't want to focus on themselves at all, and actively dislike being fussed over.

Obviously Lobo doesn't like that.

Teachers: ESTj, ISTp
If I were to describe this type's approach to love, it would be "serious." He approaches his love interest almost with the intention to "teach." This can quite possibly rub the object of his affection in the wrong way, possibly interpreted as condescension. Like the childlike type, he may tend to live "outside sexuality" and may have to intellectualize it in order to be comfortable. He is looking for a worthy pupil.

I sort of relate to that, actually. Although I'm sort of a reserved teacher at times. Sometimes I'm super upfront about it, sometimes I feel like I say too much and don't say anything. I relate to a lot of intellectualizing.

[UDP]

I guess I cannot escape the teacher vibe. Just looking at my blog on this site and my posts, I seem to.......... want to do a lot of explaining about teachable matters...

[Galen]

I actually identified with those descriptions a lot when I first read them. They kind of embody an idealized relationship for me, like the kinds of things I want to see in people but rarely ever do.

[Park]

I actually identified with those descriptions a lot when I first read them. They kind of embody an idealized relationship for me, like the kinds of things I want to see in people but rarely ever do.

Oh, shut up.

[Galen]

Oh, shut up.

Beg your pardon?

[Lobo]

Ohhh yeah.

I know a lot of NFs who seem to prefer the role of "helper" or "care-giver". sometimes they don't want to focus on themselves at all, and actively dislike being fussed over.

Obviously Lobo doesn't like that.

It's just a weird dynamic for me... In an ideal romantic case, you'd have both people focusing on the other person. The thing is that STs will naturally tend to be attuned to their own interests being met, and expect the other person to complain about things rather than exploring in their minds what could be going on with the other person. Well, this could well be that I just experienced bad relationships, but this has happened to me at least twice, and I'm happier when I don't give in to just doting over someone naively, and openly assert my own interests. I fear being taken advantage of, which might be the main issue at hand.

[Minde]

It's just a weird dynamic for me... In an ideal romantic case, you'd have both people focusing on the other person. The thing is that STs will naturally tend to be attuned to their own interests being met, and expect the other person to complain about things rather than exploring in their minds what could be going on with the other person. Well, this could well be that I just experienced bad relationships, but this has happened to me at least twice, and I'm happier when I don't give in to just doting over someone naively, and openly assert my own interests. I fear being taken advantage of, which might be the main issue at hand.

Yeah, I think I know what you mean. I think I have less a fear of being taken advantage of than you, but maybe I should have more. I also think I'm less likely than you to assert myself sometimes; I just... don't like doing it and it makes me upset when I feel I have to.

It makes me very happy to have someone think about me on their own, to consider my wants and needs without my pushing for it. That sounds selfish saying it like that... selfish to want someone to care for and consider me.

Occasionally delta STs will surprise me with moments of genuine... how to put it... they actually look, focus, figure out what I need, and work to meet that need. (The resulting work isn't usually a problem, it's the initial focus and noticing.) I haven't figured out the complete pattern for that, but it seems to happen most with ones who have had their own internal needs met already. But it is kind of rare, yeah.

[Lobo]

Yeah, I think I know what you mean. I think I have less a fear of being taken advantage of than you, but maybe I should have more. I also think I'm less likely than you to assert myself sometimes; I just... don't like doing it and it makes me upset when I feel I have to.

It makes me very happy to have someone think about me on their own, to consider my wants and needs without my pushing for it. That sounds selfish saying it like that... selfish to want someone to care for and consider me.

Occasionally delta STs will surprise me with moments of genuine... how to put it... they actually look, focus, figure out what I need, and work to meet that need. (The resulting work isn't usually a problem, it's the initial focus and noticing.) I haven't figured out the complete pattern for that, but it seems to happen most with ones who have had their own internal needs met already. But it is kind of rare, yeah.

It's not being selfish. You never want to emotionally invest in someone who isn't into you that way as well, it hurts way too much.

[UDP]

Yeah, I think I know what you mean. I think I have less a fear of being taken advantage of than you, but maybe I should have more. I also think I'm less likely than you to assert myself sometimes; I just... don't like doing it and it makes me upset when I feel I have to.

It makes me very happy to have someone think about me on their own, to consider my wants and needs without my pushing for it. That sounds selfish saying it like that... selfish to want someone to care for and consider me.

Occasionally delta STs will surprise me with moments of genuine... how to put it... they actually look, focus, figure out what I need, and work to meet that need. (The resulting work isn't usually a problem, it's the initial focus and noticing.) I haven't figured out the complete pattern for that, but it seems to happen most with ones who have had their own internal needs met already. But it is kind of rare, yeah.

FWIW I would imagine that Lobo actually gets taken advantage of less than you do. I think he is more in touch with his own needs and know how to more directly address them.

You sort of seem to not really address your needs and then get upset when someone else doesn't do it for you.

[Lobo]

FWIW I would imagine that Lobo actually gets taken advantage of less than you do. I think he is more in touch with his own needs and know how to more directly address them.

You sort of seem to not really address your needs and then get upset when someone else doesn't do it for you.

I didn't get the impression that she's questioning who gets taken advantage of more, but that she doesn't have that fear present when dealing with someone...

*waits for angry Minde's response to your post*

[ashlesha]

the descriptions don't sound way off to me. frankly, i think i'm a little more selfish than how the pseudo-caregiver is described. when i do focus outward on people i care about, it does tend to manifest in that way. but i'm pretty self-contained for the most part. i can see the lack of attendance to my own needs manifested more in a sort of passive acceptance and adaptation to my partner rather than an active energy-draining of giving activities. if that makes sense.

the "strength and gentleness" thing makes me go mmmm...lol. but isn't that true for most women?

also, if i respect someone, i find condescension to be pretty much the easiest fault to forgive. i maybe overlook it too much and put myself in a position of not having enough leverage with people. so i wonder if it is also typical of delta STs to be sensitive of that tendency.

It's just a weird dynamic for me... In an ideal romantic case, you'd have both people focusing on the other person. The thing is that STs will naturally tend to be attuned to their own interests being met, and expect the other person to complain about things rather than exploring in their minds what could be going on with the other person. Well, this could well be that I just experienced bad relationships, but this has happened to me at least twice, and I'm happier when I don't give in to just doting over someone naively, and openly assert my own interests. I fear being taken advantage of, which might be the main issue at hand.

i'm ambivalent about what you've written here. i agree that in a romantic relationship it is ideal for each person to be focused on the other. on the other hand, i absolutely can't stand being expected to read another person's mind so the part about "expecting the other person to complain about things" makes me think...well, if you don't say it out loud, its not really fair to expect the other person to know. communication and all. lol.

soo...i agree with you on principle as far as not being selfish and focusing attention toward the person you are with, but i'm not sure what you're saying your expectations are.

Oh, shut up.

lol, what?

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Hell, I identify with that and I'm not delta. =p

The problem with everybody on here, the only problem is you think you're different when you're really not. And it's just frustrating kinda to the outside world. It's like how everybody treated Johnathon in Buffy. He wanted to be this outcast (and thought he was), but really he was just sort of like everybody else. =/ And he distanced himself from other people because of that.

Does Galen really think of me as somebody that we'd subjectively clash with because we're opposing quadras? That's sad to me if he feels that way, because I don't feel that way about him. It's sort of annoying because I feel that he's the one that is pushing me away, and not me. I actually like him. And I have having to say 'actually' with that but it's like he behaves in a way where he makes you think it's a big shocker that anybody likes him.

I love you galen! I love you gay-len. I will chase you like pepe lepew chases the cat. I looooove you. I love your shy victimy gay boyness. It's soooo cute and adorable. You are sooo right. fags are too showy and pink and we need to be more dull and serious like you. You are the one. You are the true leader of gays not me. You always had more power. You are worthy and powerful gaylen. And the only reason you make people joke is you yourself are so serious. Maybe if you were light-hearted yourself we'd be serious like you want. lol

[Galen]

Does Galen really think of me as somebody that we'd subjectively clash with because we're opposing quadras? That's sad to me if he feels that way, because I don't feel that way about him. It's sort of annoying because I feel that he's the one that is pushing me away, and not me. I actually like him. And I have having to say 'actually' with that but it's like he behaves in a way where he makes you think it's a big shocker that anybody likes him.

I don't have any problems with you
The only disagreements we've really had from what I see are just based on what socionics is supposed to be. Outside of that you have some great insight into people, you aren't at all malicious, and you seem like a great guy to have around.

I love you galen! I love you gay-len. I will chase you like pepe lepew chases the cat. I looooove you. I love your shy victimy gay boyness. It's soooo cute and adorable. You are sooo right. fags are too showy and pink and we need to be more dull and serious like you. You are the one. You are the true leader of gays not me. You always had more power. You are worthy and powerful gaylen. And the only reason you make people joke is you yourself are so serious. Maybe if you were light-hearted yourself we'd be serious like you want. lol

AND THEN WE STOPPED BEING FRIENDS

But seriously thanks
I didn't know I came off as "that" serious. I think it has a lot to do with the environment I'm in, I need to be around more serious people if I want to stop being so serious. Or something. Maybe I'm just a serious guy by nature.

[Suz]

I didn't know I came off as "that" serious. I think it has a lot to do with the environment I'm in, I need to be around more serious people if I want to stop being so serious. Or something. Maybe I'm just a serious guy by nature.

You are. And there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with that.

[UDP]

You don't look overtly serious in your photos. You seem normal.

It happens sometimes to me when I am processing information, I get very serious.

[Exodus]

Pseudo-Caregivers/Students: ENFp, INFj
These are types who exhibit paternal/maternal tendencies towards others in their everyday lives and may thus carry over these notions and temperaments into their romantic life. These types habitually attempt to give their partner what he/she "needs" (or what they believe they need). As a result, they may become drained by lack of attendence to their own needs and desires. In a partner, they are searching for a combination of strength and gentleness.

I don't understand how this is any different from a description of actual Caregiver types.

[ashlesha]

I don't understand how this is any different from a description of actual Caregiver types.

from the same source:

(you've probably already seen this since you've been around awhile, but i feel like it might be good to post it for contrast)

Caregivers: ESFj, ISFp
These are those types who openly express their need to "protect" and care for their romantic interest. In conversation may often lend a sympathetic ear (which, depending on the person, may be interpreted as insincerity, but it's exactly what the Child-like type is looking for). They are looking for someone who will not only accept their paternal/maternal tendencies, but welcome and thrive on it.

[Minde]

FWIW I would imagine that Lobo actually gets taken advantage of less than you do. I think he is more in touch with his own needs and know how to more directly address them.

You sort of seem to not really address your needs and then get upset when someone else doesn't do it for you.

Even when I do point out my needs I can still get walked over, ignored, told I'm ridiculous...

I don't disagree that Lobo probably gets taken advantage of less, which is why I said maybe I should have that fear more. On the other hand, fear can cripple me so... yeah...

I didn't get the impression that she's questioning who gets taken advantage of more, but that she doesn't have that fear present when dealing with someone...

*waits for angry Minde's response to your post*

You know me well, haha...

And, yeah, it's not a competition. It was me talking about how I relate, how I differ, why, and what it might mean.

[Simon Ssmall]

I don't understand how this is any different from a description of actual Caregiver types.

For one, caregivers dont really forget their own needs. They are fine with taking care of others, themselves and their environment and it goes without compromising any of this (in most cases). Delta NF's caregiveness simply comes from overfocusing on the other person, while forgetting their own wants and needs. Not to mention "caregiving" is usually more of a psichological nature than real/simple needs.

[Minde]

For one, caregivers dont really forget their own needs. They are fine with taking care of others, themselves and their environment and it goes without compromising any of this (in most cases). Delta NF's caregiveness simply comes from overfocusing on the other person, while forgetting their own wants and needs. Not to mention "caregiving" is usually more of a psichological nature than real/simple needs.

I like this. In my experience I think for Delta NFs it's often the concern for the well-being as opposed to the actual... tending to it, I guess. ENFps seem to be better at instigating the actions which help than INFjs.

Which I guess in an odd way balances what I was complaining about the STs before. Delta NF's tend more to notice/care and Delta STs tend to actually actively fix things (once they notice/care). Hm.




I also like your location. Flying/traveling around...

[Exodus]

For one, caregivers dont really forget their own needs. They are fine with taking care of others, themselves and their environment and it goes without compromising any of this (in most cases).

False. Especially for ESEs and SEIs.

Delta NF's caregiveness simply comes from overfocusing on the other person, while forgetting their own wants and needs. Not to mention "caregiving" is usually more of a psichological nature than real/simple needs.

Well, now you're just reading into the description.

I mean, I don't think Alpha SFs are immune to overfocusing on their partners, especially when it's an unbalanced relationship, and that's when the pseudo-codependency kicks in where you're just constantly chasing after a solution to a bad relationship to the detriment of your own wellbeing and happiness.

Ya, this happens a LOT.

[Simon Ssmall]

False. Especially for ESEs and SEIs.

Im talking about Delta ST's. Topic is about Delta caregivers and infantiles.

Well, now you're just reading into the description.

Im talking from my personal experience and the other NF's that I know in real life, im not overly conserned with any description. It was an answer to you to the question you asked. If you know better than me then why do you ask questions.

[Exodus]

Im talking about Delta ST's. Topic is about Delta caregivers and infantiles.


Im talking from my personal experience and the other NF's that I know in real life, im not overly conserned with any description. It was an answer to you to the question you asked. If you know better than me then why do you ask questions.

Sorry, I just think the description is misleading.

[Creepy-male]

I don't understand how this is any different from a description of actual Caregiver types.

I'm more attracted to Infantile behaviour (i.e. playfulness, silliness) than to Caregiver behaviour (i.e. strength and gentleness).

I'm more inclined to react to signs of wanting/needing something than actively seeking out things to "Caregive". Active gestures are usually physical or emotional things like breakfast in bed (out of the blue, just to keep whomever on their toes) or incredibly mushy things that I'm too embarrassed to write about

I mean, I don't think Alpha SFs are immune to overfocusing on their partners, especially when it's an unbalanced relationship, and that's when the pseudo-codependency kicks in where you're just constantly chasing after a solution to a bad relationship to the detriment of your own wellbeing and happiness.