Conflict Relations Marriages

[anndelise]

I find it both funny and sad how people treat the idea of marriage.
How they confuse the ideal of a life long partnership as if it's a standard.

Back in hunter-gathering times, lives did not often last into the 80's and 90's like they do now.
Women began bearing children at younger ages than they do today, which means that they mated at younger ages than today. These mates were often in positions of life-threatening danger. The females were often at risk of dying due to complications in child-birth.

What this means is that mates were often parted far sooner than the modern "ideal" of a partnership lasting 40+ years. And new mates would be found.

Some older cultures would create limited term partnerships for the purpose of bearing and raising children. If no children sprang from the partnership after 1-2 years or so, the partnership would end and both parties would resume their previous life and/or find someone else to partner with.

Please don't neglect how this fits into evolution. I seriously doubt there is anything akin to a 'life-long marriage gene' in human dna. And any gene passing would have occurred long before the 40+ years of marriage was reached. So a prospective mate wouldn't have a clue if the other person had the genetic traits that might lead to a partnership lasting 40+ years. Nor was looking at the grand-parent's partnership helpful in making that determination, as the grand-parents were likely either long dead, or went through 1+ more mates due to deaths. And the parents have likely only been able to be together for 14-20 years. A significant difference from the ideal of a 40+ years partnership.


I also find it funny/sad that these people who confuse the ideal as a standard will bring up examples to support these ideals...forgetting that these examples are unique, not the standard.


And for those who ignore that marriage is a partnership, similar to a business partnership, I wonder if you're willing to spend the rest of your life with your business/job, forsaking all others, including hobbies. If your business/job partnership ended...does that mean you didn't try hard enough to keep it going? Or maybe it's because the partnership no longer served the purposes you had hoped it would. MtDew...within this context, I believe you have multiple partnerships going, rather than sticking with one true partnership for the course of the rest of your life. Am I right?

[Roro]

Such as? Let's get into specifics.

My parents divorced when I was 5. I don't think this had anything to do with the fact that they didn't care for each other, but they were 17 and 27 when they got together and got pregnant with me. Neither of them were mature or knew what they wanted out of life, and they still don't. Would it have been to my advantage if they stayed married and raised me? I sincerely doubt that. They rushed into something without thinking it through first, and that's one of the bigger problems with relationships these days - they are rushed. People get caught up in feelings of infatuation and fail to recognize the reality of the situation before jumping into marriage.

Lets look at a couple who got married, and then five years later the husband turned out to be abusive. Should the woman just stay in the marriage, continuing to be beat around, in hopes that her husband will suddenly realize how wrong he is treating his beloved wife?

[Esaman]

I find it both funny and sad how people treat the idea of marriage.

Right back at you.
If relationship for you is about pushing out babies, then it is unfortunate for you that you are human and not a smaller mammal who do so by a dozen yearly. Human development to adulthood is longest, and requires the most involvement. So health and productivity of parent partnership influences the health and future success (including reproductive) of the progeny. Also humans don't have many chances to do it right.
Also if you don't enjoy central parts of your life, you will run out of motivation very fast.
Also at some point you might realize that life doesn't have any other meaning than enjoyment and reaffirmation of itself.

[anndelise]

Right back at you.
If relationship for you is about pushing out babies, then it is unfortunate for you that you are human and not a smaller mammal who do so by a dozen yearly. Human development to adulthood is longest, and requires the most involvement. So health and productivity of parent partnership influences the health and future success (including reproductive) of the progeny. Also humans don't have many chances to do it right.
Also if you don't enjoy central parts of your life, you will run out of motivation very fast.
Also at some point you might realize that life doesn't have any other meaning than enjoyment and reaffirmation of itself.

I'm sorry if I wasn't clear enough that my view isn't that marriage is about "pushing out babies", but about being in a "partnership".

When I'm talking of "partnership", I'm referring to "A relationship between individuals or groups that is characterized by mutual cooperation and responsibility, as for the achievement of a specified goal." What that goal is can, of course, vary, depending on the persons actually involved in the partnership.

This goal may be to conceive and raise children.
Share resources.
Help each other in the pursuits/interests.
etc etc

I'm honestly not sure what the rest of your post has to do with anything I said.

[Creepy-Snaps]

I find it both funny and sad how people treat the idea of marriage.
How they confuse the ideal of a life long partnership as if it's a standard.

Back in hunter-gathering times, lives did not often last into the 80's and 90's like they do now.
Women began bearing children at younger ages than they do today, which means that they mated at younger ages than today. These mates were often in positions of life-threatening danger. The females were often at risk of dying due to complications in child-birth.

What this means is that mates were often parted far sooner than the modern "ideal" of a partnership lasting 40+ years. And new mates would be found.

Some older cultures would create limited term partnerships for the purpose of bearing and raising children. If no children sprang from the partnership after 1-2 years or so, the partnership would end and both parties would resume their previous life and/or find someone else to partner with.

Please don't neglect how this fits into evolution. I seriously doubt there is anything akin to a 'life-long marriage gene' in human dna. And any gene passing would have occurred long before the 40+ years of marriage was reached. So a prospective mate wouldn't have a clue if the other person had the genetic traits that might lead to a partnership lasting 40+ years. Nor was looking at the grand-parent's partnership helpful in making that determination, as the grand-parents were likely either long dead, or went through 1+ more mates due to deaths. And the parents have likely only been able to be together for 14-20 years. A significant difference from the ideal of a 40+ years partnership.


I also find it funny/sad that these people who confuse the ideal as a standard will bring up examples to support these ideals...forgetting that these examples are unique, not the standard.


And for those who ignore that marriage is a partnership, similar to a business partnership, I wonder if you're willing to spend the rest of your life with your business/job, forsaking all others, including hobbies. If your business/job partnership ended...does that mean you didn't try hard enough to keep it going? Or maybe it's because the partnership no longer served the purposes you had hoped it would. MtDew...within this context, I believe you have multiple partnerships going, rather than sticking with one true partnership for the course of the rest of your life. Am I right?

Aren't you divorced also, Ann? Or am I mistaken?

[anndelise]

Aren't you divorced also, Ann? Or am I mistaken?

what does my marital status have to do with anything?

[Trevor]

Are you divorced, Ann?

[Roro]

Aren't you divorced also, Ann? Or am I mistaken?

Are you going to answer my question? If you can't tell me something as simple as why a woman being abused doesn't have the right to seek a divorce, then perhaps you should just drop your argument.

Perhaps you will better understand a question that directly involves you. You are married to a woman for several years, then all the sudden she begins to threaten taking your life. The responsible man you are, you decide to just seek help for her, and she is put into an institution for a while. She gets out, but she is extremely furious that you would do such a thing. While you are sleeping one night, she cuts your penis off. Will you stay married to your wife?

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Either you use same words differently in the same sentence, or you are hilariously hypocritical.
Morality is about criticizing thoughts and punishing behaviors that you consider immoral.

Everybody is a hypocrite. I always rant here about how society needs to be more compassionate, to the 'loser' and outcast and artist but there's this annoying emo gay boy that I talk to that always Plays Victim and talks about how other people treated him like shit. Honestly it was just draining. It sucked the life out of me. I know I should have been nice and do the right thing, but it's so easy to see how he invited that stuff in by how he was thinking, and I tried to make him see how he was a participant in his own abuse. He's really likeable when he's actually caring about other people instead of feeling sorry for himself but that thing just makes you look like this scab. I always took pride in myself that I would never go away like a stuck up preppy when other people needed my help. But he didn't really need my help he was just being clingy and annoying. And it would make me feel better about myself to picture myself as the 'hero' that says things that makes him feel better about himself but that also puts me in a position where I'm 'above' him instead of equals. Either way he gets to be some sort of victim. God he's such a sub. And yet I was so sick and tired of bad boys that were hot but also sadists. It's just I wish empathetic people were more bad-ass sometimes instead of sitting there drooling and feeling sorry for themselves.

Likewise, there are people that always are rude and sociopathic and say how people are 'all fags' and not tough. but if you catch them off guard you will notice they get sensitive about stuff. In the end I believe Maritsa is just playing a role, and her 'Nice INFj girl card' is something that will only keep her stuck.

[Creepy-Snaps]

I believe there are certain circumstances in which a divorce could be understood. Abuse, in my eyes, is not tolerable.

However, I stand by my viewpoint, that people should generally, (of course there are exceptions), work harder to make a marriage work. I am not a quitter. I personally do not take 'until death do you part' lightly, although it seems other people may not take promises/commitments seriously.

I do, apologize, in perhaps directing this question at redbaron and Ann. In retrospect, I think this should be generally (of course there are exceptions) directed towards the man in the relationship. Generally, men, in my opinion, should be the leaders in the relationship. Generally, I think men have greater control over the success of the relationship - providing for the woman financially, fulfilling her wants/desires, making her feel protected, serving her, etc.

I do believe today's society generally has guys who are not real men, thinking for the short-term. Men who want to drink beer, play video games, impregnate girls then abandon them, live for the short-term, without any long-term commitments.

I asked Ann if she was divorced, as that biases her viewpoint, why she was arguing that it's not normal for a long-term relationship, without any evidence that some of our ancestors don't stay with a mate long-term, and helped raise the children, ensuring their survival.

To tie this back to the original point of this thread, for the people who don't try to make marriage work, God knows I don't understand what they think when they recite their marriage vows, then yes, perhaps this thread is of no use to you. But for the people who believe they want to make a marriage work, I thought a guide would prove useful. Nowisthetime provided a very useful link earlier on the 1st page, so that's all I was looking for.

If I offended you in any of my viewpoints in this post, I generally, (of course there are exceptions) am not sorry.

[anndelise]

I asked Ann if she was divorced, as that biases her viewpoint, why she was arguing that it's not normal for a long-term relationship, without any evidence that some of our ancestors don't stay with a mate long-term, and helped raise the children, ensuring their survival.

So, according to you,
If I was divorced, that would mean that my viewpoint was biased. (but, since I have never divorced, your claim of divorce biassing me has no grounds to stand on.)

Which leave us with the following questions:
If I was married, how would that change my supposed biasness?
If I had never been married, how would that change my supposed biasness?
If I had never been married, nor been in a longish term relationship, how would that change my supposed biasness?
If I had never been married but was in a longish term relationship, how would that change my supposed biasness?

[Creepy-Snaps]

MD, what does Maritsa type you?

LSI...

So, according to you,
If I was divorced, that would mean that my viewpoint was biased. (but, since I have never divorced, your claim of divorce biassing me has no grounds to stand on.)

'It's not my fault I quit my marriage. Humans weren't designed to last in long-term relationships.'

Which leave us with the following questions:
If I was married, how would that change my supposed biasness?

*successful marriage*: 'Marriage can be hard work sometimes, but you can overcome any problem/disagreement.'

*unsuccessful marriage*: 'Be careful who you marry, because you may not be compatible long-term, and may end up miserable.'

If I had never been married, how would that change my supposed biasness?

'Duality is awesome! Only duals have a chance in marriage, I just haven't found the right one yet.'

If I had never been married, nor been in a longish term relationship, how would that change my supposed biasness?

You wouldn't understand the commitment needed to make any relationship work, duality or conflictor.

If I had never been married but was in a longish term relationship, how would that change my supposed biasness?

'Why would you want to make a marriage work? I don't see why anyone would want to stay with someone they don't get along with.'

*the above are generalizations and do not apply in all cases*

[Roro]

Dew, how long was your longest relationship?
Have you ever been engaged?
Are your parents still married?

[Creepy-Snaps]

Dew, how long was your longest relationship?
Have you ever been engaged?
Are your parents still married?

9 months, no, and no.

[anndelise]

MtDew,

roflmao
You might want to work on those, they show that you've little experience with relationships, despite having numerous ideals. Particularly the ones that show a thinking in terms of duals and conflictors, rather than of the relationship between the two people involved.

This in particular was hilarious:

If I had never been married but was in a longish term relationship, how would that change my supposed biasness?

'Why would you want to make a marriage work? I don't see why anyone would want to stay with someone they don't get along with.'

Are you really suggesting that if I were in a long term relationship, but not married, that it would mean that I'm biased towards not wanting to make the partnership work?

Did you even read what you wrote??

[Creepy-Snaps]

Are you really suggesting that if I were in a long term relationship, but not married, that it would mean that I'm biased towards not wanting to make the partnership work?

No. Generally, I find people who date feel more freedom when choosing their girlfriends/boyfriends, and don't understand the commitment to marriage as much as people who are married.

[anndelise]

No. Generally, I find people who date feel more freedom when choosing their girlfriends/boyfriends, and don't understand the commitment to marriage as much as people who are married.

we're not talking about casual dating here, we're talking about a long term relationship.
In particular, mine, been with him for 8 years, lived with him for 3 months shy of that.
And this somehow means that I lack understanding of commitment?

While you, longest relationship of 9 months thinks he understands what it's like to be in a long term relationship??
You do realize that in this case, YOU are the "people who date" in your description,
while I am closer to the "people who are married" part of your description.

And before you say "yeah, but you're not actually MARRIED",
Just because we haven't gone to the state office and requested a ceremony doesn't mean we aren't committed to each other.

Which means according to your own description, YOU don't understand the experiences nor commitments actual married/committed people deal with.

[woofwoofl]

Ending up married to a conflictor is the bigger mistakes you can make in your life.
You may like your relationships in insane difficulty mode (in which case you are a masochist). But your children will not appreciate the mode. There is also a lot higher chance that some children will be conflictors with their parent, and that is just tragic and unfair.

I know an Fe-EIE and Si-SLI marriage that's splitting finally after over two decades, and it was bad. Some awesome kids came of it though. And yes, the marriage was dogshit on the kids too...

I have a lot of experience with conflictor relationships in marriage in particular. My parents are. I can say with full certainty, that conflictor intertype relationships is an opposite of any healthy concept of partnership between married people.
Also, I am conflictor with one of them.

Shit

I've got my mom as Ti-LII, and my dad was probably Si-ESE. There were two of them, one of me, and I was a lot smaller, especially at the beginning. No one should ever have to be a kid. Thankfully, it never lasts.

Assuming "cry you a river" doesn't signify sarcasm, thanks. I am mostly over it. Distance from their relationship (or lack of it - eventual divorce) and from the conflictor, allowed me to naturally heal emotionally even without support to my Super-Id by other people. With unlimited access to information you can dualize yourself to a certain degree.
By the way, don't get the wrong idea. Both my parents are good people.

Same here

It was odd; there was nothing wrong with any of us, we just didn't totally mesh all the time. The problem is in being effectively stuck with someone... once again, being a kid is terrible, legally and physically counting as less than human...


Anyways, people need to be around each other because they like each other, not because they feel forced to, and definitely not because there's a legislative gun to their heads. Government needs to butt the fuck out of this, and stop giving people handouts for living a "traditional" lifestyle, effectively robbing anyone else who aspires to something greater, or at least more interesting.

These synthesized economical reasons for marriage are so much bullshit, and so is the conflation of immobility with stability, and thinking that either of the two are worth aspiring to enough to discard all else in life.

I sure as hell have no plans on getting married.

[Creepy-Snaps]

And before you say "yeah, but you're not actually MARRIED",

You seem to be putting words in my mouth, and more or less arguing with yourself. What you said makes sense. You would have a better perspective than me regarding long-term relationships. How does that relate to making a conflictor marriage work?

[Ver]

Anyways, people need to be around each other because they like each other, not because they feel forced to, and definitely not because there's a legislative gun to their heads. Government needs to butt the fuck out of this, and stop giving people handouts for living a "traditional" lifestyle, effectively robbing anyone else who aspires to something greater, or at least more interesting.

These synthesized economical reasons for marriage are so much bullshit, and so is the conflation of immobility with stability, and thinking that either of the two are worth aspiring to enough to discard all else in life.
.

Couldn't agree more.

[Ver]

Also, when you observe good relationships around you, based on mutual understanding you are more likely to have similar relationship yourself.
My parents are conflictors, the relationship is TERRIBLE in every possible aspect.
Not suprisingly, me and my sister ended in a very difficult relationships for us. It took a lot of time for me and some luck as well to build my self esteem and stop behaving like a martyr but look for happiness in a relationship.

[anndelise]

You seem to be putting words in my mouth, and more or less arguing with yourself. What you said makes sense. You would have a better perspective than me regarding long-term relationships. How does that relate to making a conflictor marriage work?

Or maybe you just didn't think through your previous response all that well.
(edited to add: the "before you can say..." part was, i felt, needed to bypass your focus on 'marriage' and turn the focus onto 'relationships'.)

As for making a conflictor marriage work.
First, forget the socionics Ti label.

Two people got together for some reason, and decided to make a commitment to each other.
That reason will give you a clue as to how they can make their relationship work.
What problems they run into, and how they deal with it, will also give a clue as to what decisions they should make regarding their relationships.
What expections did each person go into this relationship with? Did their expectations agree with each other? Did they resolve any differing expections? actually resolve it, not dismiss it.

Business partnerships dissolve for a variety of reasons.
Music partnerships (bands) dissolve for a variety of reasons.
People change, grow, evolve. There is nothing wrong with that. And sometimes people grow apart.
People have social masks. Sometimes those social masks don't disolve until after the marriage. Which means one person isn't the person the other had actually committed to. They have no further commitment to the mask wearer.
People are led by their hormones and by evolutionary pressures to find a mate, breed, and raise children. Hormones and evolutionary pressures don't pay much attention to the long term consequences, nor to a non-tribal scenario. Hormones and evolutionary pressures overide most rational attempts at reasoning through decisions and far flung future consequences of them.

Friends get together, hang out, have fights, make up, hang out, etc etc.
Sometimes friends are unable or unwilling to resolve their differences.
I'd rather my partner be my friend, rather than someone that I am forced to stay with just because some religious idealogy tells me I'm going to go to hell if I don't. If you're God doesn't understand that, then I can't respect him.

Dissolutions don't have to be negative things. They don't have to be drawn out fights, nor becoming bitter enemies. Dissolutions can be supportive of the previous partner. There was something you(general) liked about them, regardless of how things have changed.

And believe it or not MtDew, a person can try too hard, and destroy their relationship that way.

[blackburry]

You seem to be putting words in my mouth, and more or less arguing with yourself. What you said makes sense. You would have a better perspective than me regarding long-term relationships. How does that relate to making a conflictor marriage work?

Oh, YOU so would've said this had she not said this first!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I agree with Kassie and Anndelise.
9 months is bullshit-- wait til you're actually in a longterm relationship.

And who the hell puts a relationship absolutely above themselves? Sounds like someone needy, clingy, and entirely unhealthy-- if a marriage isn't working, hell, if you wake up one morning and can not stand the person, Get out of it. There is nothing at all wrong with doing what is best for you. Nothing at all. SO SHUT THE FUCK UP. I was starting to find you tolerable and felt bad when people ganged up on you. not any more. You turn everything so personal, when these women are older with a hell of a lot more REAL life experience than you do-- so what, they're living a life that makes them happy, get off your moral high horse.

[Kim]

What does making it work even mean? My dual and I separated after six years because we had different plans in life (he wanted to settle down and have a family in one place and I wanted to get a Ph.D. in a different place). We could have "made it work," but one would have felt cheated. In my current 5-year super-ego relationship, things might not be as smooth as with the dual, but we have similar plans in life (he understands and accepts that I am not as flexible career-wise as he is and agrees to follow me around), so we "make it work" on that level.

"Making it work" depends on so much more than types or the combination of types.

[redbaron]

oh goodness.... I'm chuckling at this point. I'm not going into the details of my situation. You're lacking a lot of information on which your judgment rests. Nobody knows what goes on in a marriage other than the two people who are a part of it. I don't need to defend myself.

As someone pointed out, there are many many equally or even more important factors than type, in a relationship. In no way was I implying that only duality can work, or some crap like that. I was simply advising you all who haven't been through it yet, not to take a chance on marrying your conflictor. Do you really want to start a relationship with that against you? Seems unwise.

Something else that you might want to think about MD: I think your strong commitment to the institution of marriage is a good thing. But empathy for others is also valuable and it's usually best to give another person the benefit of the doubt before you judge their decisions. I'm not offended, you're young and only speaking what you believe. It's okay.

[Creepy-pokeball]

I am glad Ann brought up that entire tangent about relationships. It is extremely crucial to understand. It is even more crucial to understand the viewpoints of those that have been through it or are in it, whether or not one agrees with said viewpoints.

[Esaman]

I've got my mom as Ti-LII, and my dad was probably Si-ESE. There were two of them, one of me, and I was a lot smaller, especially at the beginning. No one should ever have to be a kid. Thankfully, it never lasts.

Woah, I can only imagine how much they reinforced each other in rubbing you the wrong way.

I sure as hell have no plans on getting married.

But don't let that unfortunate random situation to deter you from getting married altogether.

[Brilliand]

But don't let that unfortunate random situation to deter you from getting married altogether.

I think he was saying that he would avoid the legal status of "married", not the behavior that comes with the territory (such as sticking together and having kids). That would make the two parts of his post that you quoted not very related to each other.

[Ver]

Just to sum up everything that has been said so far:

People familiar with socionics are drawn to the ideal of their dual because they look for something good and fulfilling in their lives and they know that duality can give it to them - they either love the description of their duality and would love to be in one or just look for fulfilment. It doesn't or at least it shouldn't necessarily mean that they would end up in a duality relationship (but I wish we all end up in a healthy ones)
Normally people who end up being married to their conflictor or some type not good to them for any reason have made the wrong decision. I mean if there is little hope for the relationship to work it means the decision was wrong and if possible they should do something to get out of it. There is no need to "handle the worst case scenario".
The fact that you are not together anymore doesn't necessarily mean it's a failure but staying in an unhealthy, unfulfilling relationship in which you don't understand each other - is.

I think the only way "to minimize the risk people take when dating" is just to be true to yourself. Pay attention to your friends, people you feel good with. The same should apply to the person you decide to have a relationship with.
Normally, we feel some type of easiness around people we like as if you step in the same direction. IMO if someone is not suitable for you there's a lot of tension e.g. the need to explain what you did and why, what you meant, what the relationship is etc.
I feel that what I'm writing is of course only one side of the problem and I know that's a bit of simplification and there are as many cases as many people.

Moreover, I quess for most people it takes some time to learn to be mature and maybe also "humble", to understand what a relationship really is and to learn how to give and take.

There is no good solution. For some that would be staying in an unhealthy relationship, for some that would be ending it. There are people who want to be on their own, there are situations in which you or your partner change and aren't a good fit anymore.

I don't want to say "follow your heart" cause it sounds a bit too shallow to me. What I'm sure of is you firstly need to understand, accept and love yourself - only then are you able to maintain a healthy relationship with anyone. Usually the relationships are the mirror of us.

[Beautiful sky]

When two people aren't a naturally fit for one another, there is no amount of communicating one can do to try to get along because Perceptual communication style is inherently different from that of the Rational; where Rational types try to make sense of things and to understand them by bringing things of the external to their understanding, rational, logic, the Perceptual type observes and communicates the happenings rather than bringing these happenings into their bases for understanding other things that happen around them; an example is that an SEE who vents about what people are doing to her or what things and relations around her are bothering her will always do wo without making or coming up with ways to change her mental perspective, rather they will remove themselves from a situation to improve the happenings around her. A rational type will have to give up a lot of themselves to be something they are not and at what end is it acceptable to be something or to force yourself to be something you aren't; at what cost will it take away from your being and your sense of happiness to do this?

Conflictory relations naturally pick on each other's pet peeves:

Take ESE and ILI for instance; an ESE picks at an ILI for their "critical" nature, wanting them to be more of a rational analyst, as their dual is; but, because an ILI is not an analyst, the poor critic is left with such harmful, spiteful comments of "you're insecure, you worry and fret about everything I don't care about" from the ESE and the ESE in return is left with comments of "you're arrogant, narcissistic, and a know it all." And this basic argument continues, seeps into the love and sex life of the relationship and is a target on both person's type day in and day out, building resentment towards each other, causing each other not to speak to one another and distance is inevitable evolution of such a relation.

[Absurd]

When two people aren't a naturally fit for one another, there is no amount of communicating one can do to try to get along because Perceptual communication style is inherently different from that of the Rational; where Rational types try to make sense of things and to understand them by bringing things of the external to their understanding, rational, logic, the Perceptual type observes and communicates the happenings rather than bringing these happenings into their bases for understanding other things that happen around them; an example is that an SEE who vents about what people are doing to her or what things and relations around her are bothering her will always do wo without making or coming up with ways to change her mental perspective, rather they will remove themselves from a situation to improve the happenings around her. A rational type will have to give up a lot of themselves to be something they are not and at what end is it acceptable to be something or to force yourself to be something you aren't; at what cost will it take away from your being and your sense of happiness to do this?

Conflictory relations naturally pick on each other's pet peeves:

Take ESE and ILI for instance; an ESE picks at an ILI for their "critical" nature, wanting them to be more of a rational analyst, as their dual is; but, because an ILI is not an analyst, the poor critic is left with such harmful, spiteful comments of "you're insecure, you worry and fret about everything I don't care about" from the ESE and the ESE in return is left with comments of "you're arrogant, narcissistic, and a know it all." And this basic argument continues, seeps into the love and sex life of the relationship and is a target on both person's type day in and day out, building resentment towards each other, causing each other not to speak to one another and distance is inevitable evolution of such a relation.

Exactly.

[redbaron]

So... now I know three of them. All fell apart after 15/20/25 years respectively. But I wanted to say that it's not impossible for it to "work" for awhile, if your expectations aren't very high.

What basically happens is that as long as your external values align, you can focus on mutual goals. This keeps you occupied for a long time, especially if there are children in the picture and if one of you works and/or travels a lot. That takes the pressure off of dealing with each other all the time. But also, you don't ever feel "close" to one another. If this is an acceptable situation, it can be managed. The problem comes when you realize one day that "hey, I actually want to feel close to my partner. This isn't right." so then you do the sensible thing and "seek counseling". Hmmmm... problem is, when you're conflict relations, counseling makes things worse. Here's why--counseling usually is designed to bring out the truth, to encourage both parties to be more themselves, to face up to what's wrong. And when you're in a conflict relationship, there's a lot going wrong under the surface. These things can be ignored for a long time but once you're in counseling, it's over. The more you try to work on things, the more you end up pushing each other away and understanding that you're not meshing much... at all.

If you're in a conflict relationship and you really want it to last, my advice is to have low expectations for what the relationship can provide, don't look too closely at anything negative, focus on external shared goals and your own individual goals, make sure you each have other friends who are meeting your needs for understanding and accept the situation for what it is. Also, if you're an idealist, forget it. Don't waste time trying to force things to be what you want them to be, because they aren't and never will be.

The end.

p.s. those who left their conflict marriage were much happier afterwards. there is much relief if you can let go of that part of you that identifies with the pain of being in a difficult relationship.

[ashlesha]

I don't understand how this happens. the charming from a distance thing, okay. but married? drunk Vegas weddings?

more likely they would have been typed duals or illusionaries at first and then changed over time and grew apart to look like conflictors people change blah blah

[Ver]

Thank you for this post redbaron. My parents are in a conflict relationship and it's just horrible. It's never been good or normal. They're both totally neurotic and so were me an my sister when we were kids. They don't do anything together, they have separate rooms and cars and they fight all the time. Still they don't divorce and they've been married for almost 30 years. I feel sorry for them but I'm just helpless - I've somehow lost hope that there's anything me or somebody else can do. By mother has been saying she's going to divorce my dad for about 20 years. 20 years ago, as child I was extremelly frightened but now... I think they have some right to lead normal life and at least should let my younger daughter move away.

What is more, my very good ENTp male friend is about to marry his conflictor. He knows it's a bad relationship, he was even looking for a flat to move out but he somehow changed his mind. She's already completely neurotic and scared but they still want to push it through. And again... I'd really like them to work but I know the odds are not in favour.

It's so sad when you look at them and you know you can't do anything and you somehow feel the chances are not in favour of these relationships.

[Ver]

I don't understand how this happens. the charming from a distance thing, okay. but married? drunk Vegas weddings?

more likely they would have been typed duals or illusionaries at first and then changed over time and grew apart to look like conflictors people change blah blah

I think conflictors might be attracted to each other. I get on pretty well with some Beta ST, however, I belive our relationships wouldn't work well. Conflictors very often admire each other and when they get together they just start irritating each other. Another thing is, when you are used to dealing with people outside your own quadra (e.g. in family) you somehow learn how to deal with them. I think I was used to using a lot of Fe and Si, as lmost my whole family is alpha. I also had two alpha boyfriends.
Moreover, some people don't choose their partners by the feeling "it feels good" but they want to prove something to themselves e.g. "I can win his heart over" even if they subconsciously know they re not right for each other. Also, moral issues - " I cannot leave him, he's not a bad person, we just can't understand each other"

[ashlesha]

if you asked them both to type themselves on the day of their wedding, they would not type themselves conflictors.

[Ver]

Actually my friend is aware of the fact that he's conflictor with his fututre wife. He's just afraid of breaking up. They fight a lot etc. He also says "I can divorce so it's not final".

[ashlesha]

wow, that's horrible. why would he be afraid of breaking up, is she abusive or something?

[redbaron]

I don't understand how this happens. the charming from a distance thing, okay. but married? drunk Vegas weddings?

more likely they would have been typed duals or illusionaries at first and then changed over time and grew apart to look like conflictors people change blah blah

First of all, none of the people mentioned knew about socionics before they got married (obviously). Second, there are a LOT of other factors drawing people together that aren't type related. Backgrounds, timing, goals, physical attraction. I can completely understand how this happens. Also, when you've never been in a dual relationship and your own parents have a dysfunctional marriage, you start to think that's the best you can do (and that every relationship will hit that point eventually, which is simply not true). Also, you can be naive, thinking that living together and being in a partnership will automatically draw you closer. That shared experience will bond you.

ALSO, if you're sp-firsts (which all of them are, from what I can tell), you're way more focused on your external well-being, at least at first. Providing for your family, having a house, taking care of the kids, jobs, etc. And less focused on an intimate connection. In fact, my guess is that for sx-last people, this might not be important at all and they could probably live with a moderate degree of happiness in a conflict relation if they have low expectations.

[redbaron]

Another thing is, when you are used to dealing with people outside your own quadra (e.g. in family) you somehow learn how to deal with them. I think I was used to using a lot of Fe and Si, as lmost my whole family is alpha. I also had two alpha boyfriends.
Moreover, some people don't choose their partners by the feeling "it feels good" but they want to prove something to themselves e.g. "I can win his heart over" even if they subconsciously know they re not right for each other. Also, moral issues - " I cannot leave him, he's not a bad person, we just can't understand each other"

all of this. Also, if the timing is right and you have it in your head that you want to get married, you take the first acceptable "good" person you're attracted to! Not wise!