Where to find/meet ESIs-ISFjs?

[Rim]

That's fine, I just don't find most people I'd class as ESI as being as dogmatically rigid and reactive across a broad spectrum of situations as what's said in type profiles or the thoughtless stereotypes that are thrown around here. Many of these hackneyed caricatures of Type X as this or that are attempts by various persons to dissociate themselves from their own negative qualities and project them onto others. Other times it's just idiotic parroting that lacks any attempt to suss the nuances of how IEs manifest behaviorally and attitudinally in living persons of a particular type. So if in fact you "tremble with indignation at every injustice" then I'll accept that that's how you personally (and ostensibly) correspond with ESI, but in my experience that sort of militant vigilance doesn't ring true across the board. /$0.02

I found early on in the enneagram that negative qualities are good clues as to what type one actually is. They tend to be followed by horrid awakenings as to what one's real nature is. Sort of like a sudden objective glimpse into what one does and what one thinks one does. ESI or not, I am who I am and it manifests most clearly in my negative reactionary behavior. Don't take this the wrong way, I'm not some self righteous angry maniac mindlessly attacking anyone who is amoral...but certainly tend towards that kind of behavior at times in a more rational manner.

[Korpsy Knievel]

I found early on in the enneagram that negative qualities are good clues as to what type one actually is. They tend to be followed by horrid awakenings as to what one's real nature is. Sort of like a sudden objective glimpse into what one does and what one thinks one does. ESI or not, I am who I am and it manifests most clearly in my negative reactionary behavior. Don't take this the wrong way, I'm not some self righteous angry maniac mindlessly attacking anyone who is amoral...but certainly tend towards that kind of behavior at times in a more rational manner.

I can see a definite E6 slant to what you're saying here¹, though the truth of the first sentence allows it to stand alone. That is, the E-type that one finds embarrassing produces that response because it is cognizable as symbolizing one's essential faults and coping mechanisms. Personally I find this to be more true of the primary wing, which I think generally represents the seat of neurosis, than it is of the main type.²

However, since socionics concerns itself more with cognitive structuralism and interpersonal connectivity than it does with the identification and correction of deficiencies, that recognition might have a lesser effect when considering superego functions, though it will probably be present to some degree.³

Anyhow other than the initial, semi-friendly elbowing I wasn't really singling you out, just commenting on patterns I've noted on this particular forum.⁴

1. My response is less one of the E6's signature catastrophism expressed in a "horrid awakening" than it is an upwelling of laughter at the absurdity of existence. An E5 thing perhaps, maybe, potentially.
2. It is possible that the main type's foibles are less upsetting to one's self concept because they are so deeply integrated into the automatic defenses of one's ego, i.e. that portion of the mind we designate as being the conscious world-navigator, and so those deficiencies reside in a rather secure blind spot. However, the underlying shortcomings of the first wing are often an object of private contemplation and thus are more introspectively visible to the self.
3. There is no shortage whatsoever around here of complaints and excuses concerning the vulnerable function.
4. We'll save the torturous hazing necessary for induction into Gamma proper for another time. Be sure to have your application and filing fee in order at the appointed time, and eat no less than one hour prior to entering the dunk tank.