You can view the page at http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...NFj-by-Beskova
Article: Dostoyevsky, Female portrait, INFj by Beskova
You can view the page at http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...NFj-by-Beskova
I love this. It describes me so well.
I didn't get very far into this before wanting to vomit. As if EII women have to be quiet, well-behaved, demure, and dedicated to housework... oh, and also obedient, apparently.
-------------------------------------
*finishes the article*
*quietly sets down her keyboard and goes to unearth her flamethrower*
Johari/Nohari
"Tell someone you love them today, because life is short; shout it at them in German, because life is also terrifying."
Fruit, the fluffy kitty.
Lol, even the SLE description fits me better
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...STp-by-Beskova
What is at fault, then?
I fit the EII description very well
Maritsa, you know what to do.
Last edited by Absurd; 09-29-2012 at 09:56 PM.
we are....very obedientOriginally Posted by Ryene Astraelis
I didn't get very far into this before wanting to vomit. As if EII women have to be quiet, well-behaved, demure, and dedicated to housework... oh, and also obedient, apparently.
-------------------------------------
*finishes the article*
*quietly sets down her keyboard and goes to unearth her flamethrower*
-
Dual type(as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Is this a cleaned up version of the male/female type descriptions on wikisocion? If so they did a good job making it read like actual English.
http://tinyurl.com/96e6zks
Please, please tell me this is satire.
Johari/Nohari
"Tell someone you love them today, because life is short; shout it at them in German, because life is also terrifying."
Fruit, the fluffy kitty.
Look at this very classic example, Maria Shriver for years was not ALLOWED to wear pants because Arnold wouldn't let her and she OBAYED very civilly.
It's an example of not caring or emphasizing your own will so much so that you don't care about materialistic presentations nor do you influence others or want to necessarily do so. So, you let others influence your decisions with regards to certain aspects of your life.
LSE are proud, authoritarian, controlling. So, you need to have a certain "mildness" not meekness to your approach; a certain calm and rational manner, so to say. We're very patient, calm (unlike SEE who are a bit more fun/funny upbeat and energetic) and so we can put up with a lot but we are human and we have limits too; cross that limit and you may never return. That's not being mean, it's being consistent and upfront.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Nice to see all your obsessions appear together in one post.
FDG is going to take care of all those obsessions. Pick me as well, FDG. Pick me. Pick me. Meow, meow, meow, cluck. Haha!
Last edited by Absurd; 09-30-2012 at 12:52 PM.
lol, if it's your goal to live in a asymmetric relationship and be treated like a dog by your husband, there are certainly enough assholes around who would love to assume this role. A halfway decent guy would not even think of not letting his wife wear pants.
„Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
– Arthur Schopenhauer
You got that right. Wearing any kind of clothing is just absurd.
Sorry for the derail, but this is just too much...
At the end of the FAQ, they adopted Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics and replaced "robot" with "wife" (and some others too). They included a reference at the end, but it's still ridiculous.
EDIT: Actually, they may took it directly from the novel in which the "perfect" wives are, indeed, robots. I didn't know the story. Now it sounds even more like a hoax, but idk.
Last edited by Pa3s; 09-30-2012 at 04:56 PM.
„Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
– Arthur Schopenhauer
Isn't that the guy whom I saw typed some Ti beast or something or at least some kind of alpha/beta in this respect? I can be wrong, though, didn't bother to run a check myself so I can't say for sure, but judging by his fantasies on robots and what he did answer to how did he become such expert in field of robotics, he answered, I quote:Sorry for the derail, but this is just too much...
At the end of the FAQ, they adopted Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics and replaced "robot" with "wife" (and some others too). They included a reference at the end, but it's still ridiculous.
And it is ridiculous. Hmm, anyway, thanks for reminding me. Im going to put my fangs into it.Alas, I am not an expert, and I never have been. I don't know how robots work in any but the vaguest way – For that matter, I don't know how a computer works in any but the vaguest way, either. I have never worked with either robots or computers, and I don't know any details about how robots or computers are currently being used in industry.
Aren't you technophilic yourself, Pa3s?
I think you're missing the point. I think it's a cultural difference. In his time, understanding, culture, he preferred women who didn't wear pants. The LSE of NOW, would. This isn't about the pants, this is about specific requests that LSE make and how EII obey or give into them. This is about not pushing your own will against the LSE's requests. It's not about the pants, although any number of objects can change depending on the culture of the individual.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
He does seem to be Alpha, but I don't know. I never read any of his stories or anything about him personally.
Certainly, but I'd still prefer a human wife to a robotic one.
Well, I guess it's just a matter of what you expect from a relationship. If both people are okay with that, why not? It's a bit like the romance styles in socionics, since some people believe that they already represent unhealthy relationships (parent/child-like for caretaker/infantile or master/slave for aggressor/victim).
„Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
– Arthur Schopenhauer
Neither, but I'm familiar with the name. He was the first to invent the term robotics.
Allah be praised.Certainly, but I'd still prefer a human wife to a robotic one.
hahahaha oh godSorry for the derail, but this is just too much...
At the end of the FAQ, they adopted Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics and replaced "robot" with "wife" (and some others too). They included a reference at the end, but it's still ridiculous.
oh wait, I just realized this is satire lol nvm
I think there is a huge difference between a woman who is "obedient" to her husband and one who concedes because she truly cares about his happiness. I have serious trouble with the whole submission thing myself, but I hate being told what to do and being expected to follow it without a convincing explanation. Also, I've lived with a controlling LxE type, one who put our spiritual growth (as he saw it) over our emotional and mental boundaries and didn't care when we tried to put our foot down. He's trying to improve, but I'm still glad to be out of there. >_> Relationships will always require some give and take, bu there is no socionic excuse for being an ass to other people, and no dual should be expected to put up with it. But... yeah. The word "obedient" really gets me.
It's kind of a pity we don't have more LSEs around to comment, especially male ones. UDP didn't strike me as a particularly controlling sort; he seemed to talk more about how EIIs have voicing their own needs than imposing his desires on them (save in jest).
I agree with most of this. I'm sure there are men who, for cultural reasons, would not want to see their wives in something or another. Heck, there are church denominations like that. However, I would hope the couple would've figured this out before marriage and worked out a solution. It's not something I'd be happy with.
Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha...And if somebody - one of the family members so picky that they want to eat only freshly prepared food, she will cook three times a day. This is in her nature.
I was raised in a five-person family. We foraged and enjoyed leftovers. It won't kill anybody.
Johari/Nohari
"Tell someone you love them today, because life is short; shout it at them in German, because life is also terrifying."
Fruit, the fluffy kitty.
This one fits me well, though leaves out stuff too http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...NFj-by-Beskova
All in all, INFjs are just as common as any other type, so it's good to have a distinctive understanding between Fi and Fe. I'd recommend basically this link to know all the primary differences http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Jung/types.htm
This description fits me well except for the part about being drawn to dance in their youth as it covers not loving to cook to wanting things done by magic and to begin favouring with age clothing that is dark and imperceptible, though the imperceptible part doesn't really work for me.
Good.
It's not good if I'm another type though for then this description must be faulty for EII or I am faulty as another type.
Last edited by Hays; 10-01-2012 at 02:08 PM.
"The discription is faulty if it doesn't fit me 100%"
"I am an other type if I don't fit the description 100%"
Seriously? I thought we got over this.
„Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
– Arthur Schopenhauer
Descriptions probably will never fit anyone ever 100% so what a stupid thing for you to suggest that I was saying that.
Seriously....you take me too seriously....and you always seem somewhat angry in your responses to me in some way.
I was saying somewhere above that the description fits me well & then playing with Absurd's 'good' by saying that the description wouldn't be that good an EII description if I happened to not be an EII.
Last edited by Hays; 10-01-2012 at 02:09 PM.
I think there are still enough people who think along these lines. And that was what you said. It's good that you're aware of the relativity of typology, though.
To be fair, you added that winky face later.
No, I'm not.
„Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
– Arthur Schopenhauer
It's biased towards EIIs...
I really have to say I wonder why every INFj portrait is so stereotyped towards enneagram 2, 4 and 9 tritype combination. I can see how some of the traits apply to me but the romanticized and kind nature is just pushed too far.
This description is BULLSHIT
Russian women... It is expected hence Russian EIIs might totally adopt those habits.
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org
This just described my last relationship, i had to dress a certain way and he dictated some things that were allowed/not allowed for me and i did just to please and compromise for him. I'm glad I'm not alone with this. Although it destroyed me.
Thank you for this. People treat this word so negatively that it almost makes me feel ashamed that I'm obedient by nature.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
