SEE/ESFp and ILI/INTp Duality? (Aggressor-Victim)

[Chae]

So LSE si needs and EII Ne? hum. I do well with the Te subtypes that are more decisive about their physical sensations and know what to eat, what's healthy without being too much like babies about it.

Indeed. Yet, the infantile share of this relation is an EII's. When LSE-Te can provide everything that your Te suggestive needs (subconsciously), superb

Ne as a function isn't the most extraverted anyway, that would be Se territory because of the tangible properties and forces it deals with. In short: Ne-Te works well. Se-Ni, however, is a more extreme combination among subtype pairing. SLE-Se/IEI-Ni duality has the greatest discrepancy in respective externality/internality.
To me, Aggressor-Victim relations depend on energy exchange more than Infantile-Caregiver duals.

[inabox]

I just watched show on Hulu "You're the Worst."

Tis ILI guy with SEE female.

Eh, the woman is definitely SLE, the second season emphasized the Fi polrness. He however is clearly ILI, the Fe polr is strong with that one.

[Chae]

Some more input concerning Aggressor/Victim dynamics under the aspect of subtypes.




What I noticed about the SEE in a romantic context is that they want to "feel" in charge but don't necessarily have to "be".
That largely differs from SLE/IEI duality where the aggressor wants to feel like the leader while being the leader. SEE-Fi is especially prone to needing guidance because their is a lot less strengthened. Lacking in business logic leads to outsourcing of all organizational matters to ILI-Te. Their aggressor/victim roles are not that pronounced because the hidden agendas reverse. And: the suggestive functions are not as "hungry" because they can function themselves. SEE-Fi is a lot better at Ni than SEE-Se, for instance.


So of course. SEE-Se and ILI-Ni have a lot more power play going on. ILI-Ni takes charge by mapping out the general plan for the couple, providing insight, being creative, looking for solutions. SEE-Se feels in charge as they practically govern ILI-Ni's physical body, which is the latter's biggest problem. ILI-Ni would rather be a brain with hands and legs. SEE-Se helps them out. That's why Ni subtypes can be very touchy, they like the tactile impact that SEE-Se has on them. Consequently, SEE-Fi and ILI-Te sit close to each other while ILI-Ni might as well sit on SEE-Se's lap.


The Se/Ni subtype dynamic is so salient because the individuals are from more opposite poles, strong reality focus and strong imagination focus.
Fi-Te subtype duality, on the other hand, can resemble ESI/LIE couples. Their aggressor-victim roles may switch constantly or come across as more neutral. In some cases, they even reverse.


and are very extreme functions on a spectrum. The correspondent subtypes have a lot more energy exchange going on. ILI-Te is chilled air, SEE-Fi is warm air, they create wind. The volcano-like SEE-Se and ILI-Ni's cold depth are more like a smaller thunderstorm. There's a lot more to neutralize here, that's why the Se-Ni subtype partners can change a lot when they are together. They are more... out of their comfort zone. It takes all of SEE-Se's efforts to break down ILI-Ni's walls, so they have to use new methods and try again and again. ILI-Ni needs to figure out everything all while absorbing SEE-Se's bravado. This calls for a change of personality, too. ILI-Ni might dip into ESI-Fi mode to put SEE-Se to the test (this is a theory of mine, the hidden agenda + suggestive can take over when the leading+creative don't suffice). ILI-Te is more of an advisor and not an exact victim of SEE-Fi's influence, they come together more easily and depart with difficulty ( and aren't as flexible). There is more attachment while the other dual pairing is all about the push and pull.

Should I write about SEE-Se/ILI-Te and SEE-Fi/ILI-Ni as well?

[Adam Strange]

Should I write about SEE-Se/ILI-Te and SEE-Fi/ILI-Ni as well?

Yes, of course. Also, if you have an opinion, about ESI and LIE.

[Chae]

SEE- Se and ILI-Te: Very obscure interplay, but the roles are definitely distributed. ILI-Te can get annoyed by SEE-Se's overly forceful ways, which is more a reflection of them rather than SEE-Se's fault. ILI-Te's is problematic, SEE-Se is lacking in - their ENFj friend probably has to drop by on occasion. Aggressor-Victim dynamics are more subdued here, especially on the side of the INTp. Sensory and logical functions are more predominant in the latter and they may result in the ILI bossing the SEE around. ILI-Te is a pseudo-aggressor and needs a pseudo-victim (SEE-Fi).

The ethical information elements are underemphasized here, so the relationship may be a little colder. The subtype may constantly feel rejected by ILI-Te's busy agenda, wanting to be with them but having to wait and using too much volitional energy. ILI-Te's demonstrative function is rather relentless, creating an almost conflictor-like INTj vibe to them, and that disorients SEE-Se a lot. It's important that ILI-Te makes greater use of Ni and SEE-Se uses Fi so they can get along.
As for role distribution, SEE-Se will provide the energy for ILI-Te's plans when they choose to work together, which may almost happen naturally when the circumstances are adequate. Probably the most energetic Gamma combination of subtypes, yet not as serious as their rational counter-duals. On the long run, average range versions of these subtypes might work out better than SEE-Se with an unhealthy ILI-Ni or vice versa.


SEE-Fi and ILI-Ni: I personally like a SEE-Fi and have the feeling that they shake up my heart a bit too much with their ethical functions. Which isn't necessarily bad for the relation because SEE impacting ILI on an emotional level is the purpose of this duality. But SEE-Fi isn't the most assertive person and not too business-inclined (and more secretly hardworking) unless they're in a safety zone. New environments seem to bother them a bit more than SEE-Se. Which is exactly the same case with ILI-Ni, who looks for a very straightforward person that breaks down their stronghold. So it feels like being with their activity partner, ESI. Just a more chaotic and charming version. In my experience, the aggressor-victim balance is more present.

The lack of strengthened logical functions can be blatant, both SEE-Fi and ILI-Ni are sometimes clueless. ILI-Ni is also lacking a lot in volition, which SEE-Fi does provide but not indulge in. On top of that, they are strong in and that may bother the INTp quite a lot.
SEE-Fi looks for an ENTj-like resonance and cooperation, something ILI-Ni tends to avoid unless under pressure. ILI-Ni can be self-assured but living in their imagination, efforts on the side of the ESFp have to be attempted all the time. The power dynamics are murky. SEE-Fi is ILI-Ni's favourite and vice versa nevertheless, simply because they are both strong in matters and that means extensive bonding and silent mutual understanding. SEE-Fi might not be as intrusive as SEE-Se but ILI-Ni can adjust this by tapping into their .

As for ESI-LIE subtypes & aggressor/victim energies, aren't you more proficient in this field @Adam Strange?

[Joy]

I'm really, really curious to know what an SEE's and ILI's duality looks like in a romantic relationship. What's it like?

Maybe someday I'll let you know my experiences. A couple of times I almost got into a relationship with an ILI, but neither was a good fit for non-Socionics reasons. (Both were drug addicts, and in both cases I couldn't deal with that even though I liked them.)

Edit: And actually, in BOTH cases, the person and I talk and agreed that we should put things on hold and maybe date later, and it never ended up happening.

[Joy]

SEE/ILI is about solving each other's problems... (etc.)

<3

[Adam Strange]

As for ESI-LIE subtypes & aggressor/victim energies, aren't you more proficient in this field @Adam Strange?

No, I'm not. I'm kind of an epic fail at ESI-LIE romantic relations. I've recently been giving a lot of thought to why this is so. I may post something when I come to some conclusions.

[Chae]

<3

Oh stop it, you...

[Chae]

No, I'm not. I'm kind of an epic fail at ESI-LIE romantic relations. I've recently been giving a lot of thought to why this is so. I may post something when I come to some conclusions.

No problem, is patient. Looking forward to your assessment if you have one, then.

[Joy]

Oh stop it, you...

Not gonna

[Chae]

Not gonna

In that case: Yes yes, more hearts please <333 You can get plenty of them as well <3 <3

[Joy]

In that case: Yes yes, more hearts please <333 You can get plenty of them as well <3 <3

[End]

Maybe someday I'll let you know my experiences. A couple of times I almost got into a relationship with an ILI, but neither was a good fit for non-Socionics reasons. (Both were drug addicts, and in both cases I couldn't deal with that even though I liked them.)

Edit: And actually, in BOTH cases, the person and I talk and agreed that we should put things on hold and maybe date later, and it never ended up happening.

Well that's the real problem in the end. A great instant substitute for the we crave is drugs. Sucks but that's just how it works out. Most civilizations exalt the Infant/Caregiver duality over the Aggressor/Victim duality for good reason. The later is way more volatile. It's much more unstable in the end, which is why "civilization" paints it in a bad light.

It's all about preserving a given "status-quo" in the end. Sadly, this status quo is seldom beneficial to more than a small percentage of any given population. The ILI sees this and, rightfully concluding that only a great catastrophe could ever get a goodly amount of people to take him/her seriously, just gets high in order to just say "fuck it" to everything.

[Chae]

Well that's the real problem in the end. A great instant substitute for the we crave is drugs. Sucks but that's just how it works out. Most civilizations exalt the Infant/Caregiver duality over the Aggressor/Victim duality for good reason. The later is way more volatile. It's much more unstable in the end, which is why "civilization" paints it in a bad light.

It's all about preserving a given "status-quo" in the end. Sadly, this status quo is seldom beneficial to more than a small percentage of any given population. The ILI sees this and, rightfully concluding that only a great catastrophe could ever get a goodly amount of people to take him/her seriously, just gets high in order to just say "fuck it" to everything.

Where is the lie. Aggressor/Victim dynamics are only praised in the media because it's something portrayed as exciting and exciting stuff sells. But I wonder what happened to the fact that SEE is a super common type? Especially male heterosexual ILIs live in a paradise of ESFp girls. And there are so many SLEs everywhere, it's a successful type in many nations.

[Resonare]

Where is the lie. Aggressor/Victim dynamics are only praised in the media because it's something portrayed as exciting and exciting stuff sells. But I wonder what happened to the fact that SEE is a super common type? Especially male heterosexual ILIs live in a paradise of ESFp girls. And there are so many SLEs everywhere, it's a successful type in many nations.

It's sad but I don't think SEE females actually chase ILI men until later on in life when they want a "weak" provider they can exert power over.

The ones that fail become "cougars" , but it's interesting how an age gap tends to be prevalent in this dual dyad

[Joy]

Well that's the real problem in the end. A great instant substitute for the we crave is drugs. Sucks but that's just how it works out. Most civilizations exalt the Infant/Caregiver duality over the Aggressor/Victim duality for good reason. The later is way more volatile. It's much more unstable in the end, which is why "civilization" paints it in a bad light.

It's all about preserving a given "status-quo" in the end. Sadly, this status quo is seldom beneficial to more than a small percentage of any given population. The ILI sees this and, rightfully concluding that only a great catastrophe could ever get a goodly amount of people to take him/her seriously, just gets high in order to just say "fuck it" to everything.

That's totally what happened with these two. "Shit is shitty, and there's nothing I can do about it." I entertained the notion that they wouldn't do drugs and just generally have lazy, shitty lives if I were around them more, but at the end of the day, I feel strongly that it's unwise to enter a relationship trying to change the other person. Take them or leave them as they are.

It's sad but I don't think SEE females actually chase ILI men until later on in life when they want a "weak" provider they can exert power over.

The ones that fail become "cougars" , but it's interesting how an age gap tends to be prevalent in this dual dyad

It seems that's the path I'm on, though I am NOT I'm looking for a "provider".

[Adam Strange]

It seems that's the path I'm on, though I am NOT I'm looking for a "provider".

What are the characteristics of the person you are looking for?

[Joy]

What are the characteristics of the person you are looking for?

Well I haven't actually been looking lately. I planned to go back to the hunt in like six months or so once I get some stuff handled. But once I do, I'm looking for someone who's okay with polyamory, scrawny to average build, preferably 28 to 40 years old but in the very least older than 18 and younger than 50 years old, preferably sexually submissive but in the very least not dominant, preferably local but in the very least inside continental US, preferably Ni ego (but not EIE) but open to other possibilities depending on the person, can show proof of no STIs, and just a cool person. I could elaborate on that last item.

I could also throw in more typology crap like preferably sp/sx but in the very least contraflow and preferably ELFV but in the very least not 1L or 3V.

[Adam Strange]

Well I haven't actually been looking lately. I planned to go back to the hunt in like six months or so once I get some stuff handled. But once I do, I'm looking for someone who's okay with polyamory, scrawny to average build, preferably 28 to 40 years old but in the very least older than 18 and younger than 50 years old, preferably sexually submissive but in the very least not dominant, preferably local but in the very least inside continental US, preferably Ni ego (but not EIE) but open to other possibilities depending on the person, can show proof of no STIs, and just a cool person. I could elaborate on that last item.

Thanks, that was helpful. I know a few ILI's. They are all good friends and most of them I've known for many years, and I kind of want to make their lives better, if I can, and that includes pointing them toward the right partners. They are all so buttoned down and rational, clear thinkers, practical, funnily ironic and intelligent. One of them was one of my best friends in HS, and I just assumed he would want a demure, introverted woman. Instead, he told me he had a crush on my chemistry lab partner, who I knew was really smart (she was a very pretty blonde who was a very well-developed, unmistakably female - kind of in-your-face- female), but she acted like a ditz. I could see that her ditzyness was an act, and that puzzled me, but I had seen stranger things. He was nuts about her, but seemed unable to approach her in HS. A couple years ago, he told me he'd give anything to know what happened to her since HS.

My financial advisor is also ILI, and he wears three-piece pinstripe suits, button down collars, vests, etc. One day I was in his office getting coffee, and over the coffee machine was a picture of two women dressed (or undressed) like they were at Burning Man. He said he took that picture, aren't they great? I suddenly had this image of a skinny guy wandering around in the desert in a three-piece suit with a camera, taking pictures of half-naked women. Before I learned about Socionics, I'd have just dismissed this as his peculiar fetish, but now I see that all these guys like the same kind of women.

Maybe ""need" the same kind of women" would be more accurate.

[Joy]

Now I feel like I should probably expand on what makes a person cool. lol

[Resonare]

It seems that's the path I'm on, though I am NOT I'm looking for a "provider".

Correction - Beta male cuckhold.

[Olimpia]

Well I haven't actually been looking lately. I planned to go back to the hunt in like six months or so once I get some stuff handled. But once I do, I'm looking for someone who's okay with polyamory, scrawny to average build, preferably 28 to 40 years old but in the very least older than 18 and younger than 50 years old, preferably sexually submissive but in the very least not dominant, preferably local but in the very least inside continental US, preferably Ni ego (but not EIE) but open to other possibilities depending on the person, can show proof of no STIs, and just a cool person. I could elaborate on that last item.

I could also throw in more typology crap like preferably sp/sx but in the very least contraflow and preferably ELFV but in the very least not 1L or 3V.

That's oddly specific, haha.

Based on what I know, the kind of person you are looking for would most likely be IEE or maybe EII-Ne.

I don't know of any ILI who is into polyamory. I know of a guy who is and seems to be LIE Sx/So, but he is definitely the Dom.
Hence I find Gamma NT is rather unlikely going to be the type who would fit this profile.

Most people who are into Polyamory and/or "open marriage" seem to be IEE Sx/So 7.
In general, it looks like polyamorous circles are full of contraflow Delta NFs.
Could have something to do with polyamory being, in an idealistic way, kind of like hippy love – "free love".

valuing (and Demonstrative) individuals (esp. the males) are not as common in those circles, because they typically are rather possessive of their partners and can be jealous more easily.

So, Delta NF it is (most likely).

[maniac]

Where is the lie. Aggressor/Victim dynamics are only praised in the media because it's something portrayed as exciting and exciting stuff sells. But I wonder what happened to the fact that SEE is a super common type? Especially male heterosexual ILIs live in a paradise of ESFp girls. And there are so many SLEs everywhere, it's a successful type in many nations.

the types are evenly spread

[Chae]

the types are evenly spread

Not in what I've read. The sample size was relatively small though

[Chae]

That's oddly specific, haha.

Based on what I know, the kind of person you are looking for would most likely be IEE or maybe EII-Ne.

I don't know of any ILI who is into polyamory. I know of a guy who is and seems to be LIE Sx/So, but he is definitely the Dom.
Hence I find Gamma NT is rather unlikely going to be the type who would fit this profile.

Most people who are into Polyamory and/or "open marriage" seem to be IEE Sx/So 7.
In general, it looks like polyamorous circles are full of contraflow Delta NFs.
Could have something to do with polyamory being, in an idealistic way, kind of like hippy love – "free love".

valuing (and Demonstrative) individuals (esp. the males) are not as common in those circles, because they typically are rather possessive of their partners and can be jealous more easily.

So, Delta NF it is (most likely).

That's a good way of looking at it. Contraflow is one of the most important elements here. As for enneagram, 7/8/4 and maybe 9 fit the category.

[Chae]

It's sad but I don't think SEE females actually chase ILI men until later on in life when they want a "weak" provider they can exert power over.

The ones that fail become "cougars" , but it's interesting how an age gap tends to be prevalent in this dual dyad

I did some research. Larger age disparity in couples (esp married ones) is still not very common so maybe SEE/ILI focuses on one of these aspects? Attention: heteronormative.

- different income levels
- having children (the more a culture values offspring, the higher the age gap)
- late marriage
- high emphasis on gender roles
- unconventionalism: FLR/ cougar themes
as you said
- (subconscious?) chronophilia
- choosing to live in cultures that don't place taboos on age gaps

As for queer couples, not enough data available on that ;~;

My ultimate theory would be that since we're not "true" aggressors or victims like our Beta equivalents, the roles have to be set through age.

[Olimpia]

That's a good way of looking at it. Contraflow is one of the most important elements here. As for enneagram, 7/8/4 and maybe 9 fit the category.

Yep. I'd agree, except for suggesting Enneagram 8, they are usually Doms or at least definitely don't like to be/feel too submissive at all.

[Adam Strange]

That's oddly specific, haha.

Based on what I know, the kind of person you are looking for would most likely be IEE or maybe EII-Ne.

I don't know of any ILI who is into polyamory. I know of a guy who is and seems to be LIE Sx/So, but he is definitely the Dom.
Hence I find Gamma NT is rather unlikely going to be the type who would fit this profile.

Most people who are into Polyamory and/or "open marriage" seem to be IEE Sx/So 7.
In general, it looks like polyamorous circles are full of contraflow Delta NFs.
Could have something to do with polyamory being, in an idealistic way, kind of like hippy love – "free love".

valuing (and Demonstrative) individuals (esp. the males) are not as common in those circles, because they typically are rather possessive of their partners and can be jealous more easily.

So, Delta NF it is (most likely).

Just to add another data point, I am LIE Sx/So, and I am not into polyamory. I might date several women at once, but once I find one I like, I stop looking at other women.
It is hard to see how the ESI-LIE duality, that is founded on mutual trust, could include having other partners, but the world is wide.
Actually, I know two female LIE's and at least three male LIE's, and all of them are repulsed at the idea of cheating. One guy, who is not-very-happily married to an LII extinguishment partner, is envious of the fact that I am divorced and can roll the dice again, but he himself is staying put. (I think he is an Sp/So e3, though.)

[totalize]

yeah ceterum censeo Polyamory esse delendam tbfh i am sooooooooooo not into that nonsense

[Olimpia]

Just to add another data point, I am LIE Sx/So, and I am not into polyamory. I might date several women at once, but once I find one I like, I stop looking at other women.
It is hard to see how the ESI-LIE duality, that is founded on mutual trust, could include having other partners, but the world is wide.
Actually, I know two female LIE's and at least three male LIE's, and all of them are repulsed at the idea of cheating. One guy, who is not-very-happily married to an LII extinguishment partner, is envious of the fact that I am divorced and can roll the dice again, but he himself is staying put. (I think he is an Sp/So e3, though.)

Yeah, I know that most LIEs are not into it.
I really just know one polyamory individual who might be LIE, haha.
But most LIEs seem repulsed by it.

Anyway, this is just showing how it is rather unlikely to find a Gamma NT who fits her description.

[maniac]

Yep. I'd agree, except for suggesting Enneagram 8, they are usually Doms or at least definitely don't like to be/feel too submissive at all.

People are sometimes the opposite in their sex life.

[Joy]

Thanks for all of the responses! ^_^

Now I feel like I should probably expand on what makes a person cool. lol

Okay, so... The most important things are honesty, intelligence, and kindness. I also have zero interest in egomaniacs, so someone who doesn't take themselves too seriously is ideal. A good sense of humor that meshes well with mine is also important because I love to laugh. I have no chill at all, so I am typically drawn to really chill, laid back, go with the flow, calming people. I also find it super endearing when someone is blunt to the point of being accidentally rude (at least in some people's eyes). Quiet, shy, and romantically/sexually timid is ideal. I want to be the one in pursuit!

That's a good way of looking at it. Contraflow is one of the most important elements here. As for enneagram, 7/8/4 and maybe 9 fit the category.

Hm. That might be too close to my tritype, I think. And I'm not so sure I'd want someone with an 8 in their tritype! I like 5s. 9s can be too reluctant to communicate openly. 6s can be too clingy, but I wouldn't totally write off a 6 or 9.

I'm mostly open for enneagram type though I guess. Like you said, the main thing is contraflow. I may have to go for an so/sp if the sp/sxs just aren't into sharing. There's actually a local so/sp ILI guy who has caught my eye, but I'm not sure if he's into polyamory, and I can't pursue him as openly as I would like because I know him through business. We'll see what happens there.

People are sometimes the opposite in their sex life.

I don't want someone who's dominant in day to day life, either.

That's oddly specific, haha.

Based on what I know, the kind of person you are looking for would most likely be IEE or maybe EII-Ne.

I don't know of any ILI who is into polyamory. I know of a guy who is and seems to be LIE Sx/So, but he is definitely the Dom.
Hence I find Gamma NT is rather unlikely going to be the type who would fit this profile.

Most people who are into Polyamory and/or "open marriage" seem to be IEE Sx/So 7.
In general, it looks like polyamorous circles are full of contraflow Delta NFs.
Could have something to do with polyamory being, in an idealistic way, kind of like hippy love – "free love".

valuing (and Demonstrative) individuals (esp. the males) are not as common in those circles, because they typically are rather possessive of their partners and can be jealous more easily.

So, Delta NF it is (most likely).

How much have you actually interacted in the poly community though? People keep offering insights like this just from how they surmise it would probably be or based on very small sample groups. Also, "the poly community" is super So instinct focused, but that doesn't mean that there aren't people who are less community-oriented hiding out there somewhere who would be cool with polyamory simply because they're busy with work/whatever or live far away or are already in an unfulfilling relationship (potentially due to not having their BDSM desires met) that they aren't looking to leave. Do I think it'll be easy to find someone who meets what I'm looking for? No. But I'm not about to start dating a freakin so-first EII just because that's (potentially) the majority of what's out there. lol An IEE who likes my aggressive approach may be acceptable though.

And btw, I've mostly found SEIs in my search so far. And I've already got one those! I just purposely scared one off, and I brushed off another a few months back. They were both sx last, just like the SEI I already have. Ugh. I don't need your lectures on safety, dude.

[Joy]

Correction - Beta male cuckhold.

Yes, that's a possibility. lol

[Kim]

Just to add another data point, I am LIE Sx/So, and I am not into polyamory. I might date several women at once, but once I find one I like, I stop looking at other women.

I am not either. I can't even date several people at the same time. When I go on a date and like the person, I don't go on another date until it's clear that nothing will come out of that first one.

It doesn't not seem like polyamory would be appealing to sx-firsts?

[Adam Strange]

I am not either. I can't even date several people at the same time. When I go on a date and like the person, I don't go on another date until it's clear that nothing will come out of that first one.

It doesn't not seem like polyamory would be appealing to sx-firsts?

I think being Sx-first means having one person you can count on. Not two or three that you're exchanging post cards with on the holidays.

[ashlesha]

I am not either. I can't even date several people at the same time. When I go on a date and like the person, I don't go on another date until it's clear that nothing will come out of that first one.

It doesn't not seem like polyamory would be appealing to sx-firsts?

I'm the same. I relate to a lot of what you say about dating and expectations and impatience and the only way I've found to mediate it is to downplay the importance of romantic relationships in my life in general (not saying you can/should do the same, but restructuring my worldview this way is a work in process that's been on my mind a lot)

[Kim]

I think being Sx-first means having one person you can count on. Not two or three that you're exchanging post cards with on the holidays.

I think it's more than "having a person you can count on." I think it's wanting this person to be part of your life in as many ways as possible. In a relationship with another sx-first, we spent all available time together and really really enjoyed sharing a physical space. We could go our separate ways during the day of course, but there was always a sense of total commitment to each other (I can't really describe it). I have not had that kind of co-existence with anyone else, but I always want that. In relationships with sx-lasts, I really struggle with their need for personal space because I can't help but take it personally. It feels like they are cutting themselves off from me and that leaves a wound of some sort.

I can't imagine that being possible with more than one person, which is why I don't think polyamory would be a particularly sx-first desire.

[Kim]

I'm the same. I relate to a lot of what you say about dating and expectations and impatience and the only way I've found to mediate it is to downplay the importance of romantic relationships in my life in general (not saying you can/should do the same, but restructuring my worldview this way is a work in process that's been on my mind a lot)

I think I should do that, but I find it incredibly hard to do when I live in a place where literally all my local friends are in relationships and I am always the only single person. It's depressing because it sort of reinforces what I am trying to overcome - the sense that being in a relationship is normal and I am somehow deviant (apart from the fact that I really do very much enjoy being in a committed relationship).

Sorry for being off-topic...we can split this into a thread called "Modern dating woes" if it's a problem.

[Joy]

I'm not convinced that polyamory is type related. Most people aren't wired for it regardless of their type, in any case.