・゚*✧ 𝓘 𝓌𝒾𝓁𝓁 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒶𝒸𝒸𝑒𝓅𝓉 𝒶 𝓁𝒾𝒻𝑒 𝓘 𝒹𝑜 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒹𝑒𝓈𝑒𝓇𝓋𝑒 ✧*:・゚
She is so sexy and edgy. Love it.
No comment on type, just sayn : /
ISTP + drugs history would behave something like this
LIE probably - she always plays LIE's as well.
So you feel like she's your dual, @Person?
How do you feel about her? Because if she IS LSE, then you're in a position where you're dual's or conflictor.
・゚*✧ 𝓘 𝓌𝒾𝓁𝓁 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒶𝒸𝒸𝑒𝓅𝓉 𝒶 𝓁𝒾𝒻𝑒 𝓘 𝒹𝑜 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒹𝑒𝓈𝑒𝓇𝓋𝑒 ✧*:・゚
・゚*✧ 𝓘 𝓌𝒾𝓁𝓁 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒶𝒸𝒸𝑒𝓅𝓉 𝒶 𝓁𝒾𝒻𝑒 𝓘 𝒹𝑜 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒹𝑒𝓈𝑒𝓇𝓋𝑒 ✧*:・゚
Reminder that Gillian Anderson created life on this earth.
・゚*✧ 𝓘 𝓌𝒾𝓁𝓁 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒶𝒸𝒸𝑒𝓅𝓉 𝒶 𝓁𝒾𝒻𝑒 𝓘 𝒹𝑜 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒹𝑒𝓈𝑒𝓇𝓋𝑒 ✧*:・゚
Seems like Fi/Te people love her. Gamma the most.
・゚*✧ 𝓘 𝓌𝒾𝓁𝓁 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒶𝒸𝒸𝑒𝓅𝓉 𝒶 𝓁𝒾𝒻𝑒 𝓘 𝒹𝑜 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒹𝑒𝓈𝑒𝓇𝓋𝑒 ✧*:・゚
I never really liked her that much, always struck me as being sort of cardboard-like. I think people are right that she's one of the logical Gammas. That might rule out Gamma quadra as being the one I'm in.
I've never seen anything with Gillian Anderson in it before, so this was my first exposure to her. She does seem Gamma to me, and as for her likeability, well, she had me at "Do you want a blowjob?".
P.S.
OK, I just watched "Gillian Anderson kisses David Letterman" in the OP's first post, and I could totally understand his reaction to her. I find her extremely hot. Letterman is LIE, but I'm not really sure if Anderson is also LIE. Gamma, yes, but Gillian seems a bit too emotionally expressive to be LIE. The female LIE's I have met are more emotionally flat, like, "I hate stupid people, and the odds are pretty good that you are stupid, too. Now convince me you are not. If you can." Granted, LIE's can come off as assholes, and it looks like Gillian isn't bad at that, but duals can sometimes look like each other.
You can see how hard I'm trying to shoehorn her into the ESI category.
Last edited by Adam Strange; 07-21-2016 at 03:51 PM.
Her letter to her 16-year-old self sounds like a copy-paste from the Delta forum, among a few other things she has said about herself. Most likely LSE, and Sx-first from her quotes.
Dear Gillian,
You are completely and utterly self obsessed. If you spent a quarter of your time thinking about others instead of how much you hate your thighs, your level of contentment and self worth would expand exponentially. One thing I learned way too late in the game for my own good was that you can effectively increase your self esteem by doing estimable things. Therefore I have signed you up to build homes for the homeless during your entire summer vacation. Your Christmas will be spent serving food at a battered women’s shelter and Easter is designated to reading stories to children in the pediatric cancer ward. Four months out of 16 years dedicated to human beings other than yourself, you have gotten off easy. Oh and honey expand your horizons; your world is a bigger oyster than your low self-esteem wants you to believe. Love yourself; think of others and be grateful. I love you, I believe in you, and I look forward to respecting you.
Me. You. Us.
P.S. Follow your dreams, not your boyfriends.
Anderson's letter to her teenage self — from Dear Me: More Letters To My Sixteen-Year-Old Self, edited by Joseph Galliano. (June 19, 2011)
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Gillian_Anderson
Damn.
Wanting to be respected and telling others to build houses for the homeless to increase their self-esteem does sound Delta. Damn.
Must be the sx part I like.
Damn....
P.S.
Wait a minute, Silke. I have never, ever in my life heard an LSE talk about sex. Both my mother and sister are LSE, and you'd think I'd have noticed that. Also, a very good friend of mine is LSE, we are best buds, and the closest he's ever come to talking about sex was to say he and his wife had a "date night".
On the other hand, Lungs talks about sex all the time. And might not an ESI want to build homes for the homeless? I wouldn't, so it would make sense that my dual might.
So, I'm back to thinking Gillian is ESI.
I'm not so sure, Adam ... I'm sorta liking the image of Gillian Anderson having both you and @Eris carve large granite stones with copper chisels and drag them on your shoulders to the next site for a homeless shelter in order to 'improve yourselves as human beings', with the sound of her whip breaking in the background, so I'm keeping at the LSE typing for her. P.S. There was no talk of sex. Only your grateful free labor on vacations.
I'm already improved, Silke, so none of that is happening.
It is a pretty good description of life under an LSE, though. My mother is LSE, and it took me a long time to get free of her bullshit about me needing to do whatever she wants that minute "for my own good". "I'm only beating you so you will become a better person." Very televangelical.
But I'm free now. "Free at last, free at last, thank God Almighty, I'm free at last!" And I will kill to stay this way.
P.S. Sex with an LSE is a revolting thought to me, and none of the one's I've met since my mother have changed my inclinations. This is why I'll keep the ESI (Se-maybe) typing for Gillian. She seems aggressive to me, but on some level, tamable.
You should check out the X-Files then.
She seems very EJ to me but you could be right about her being too expressive for LIE. She's nowhere near as stoic as her X-Files character but she is just as blunt in real life as she is in that role, so that's why it's not hard for her to act stoic. IME as a Gamma SF it's not hard for me to act like a Gamma NT because there's a part of that in me. But I get the impression that she does hate stupid people and that she's always been that way and that it isn't something she acquired for catching her dual. Hating stupid people and coming off as an asshole is a quality shared by every Gamma type, though. The way that quality is presented and used by an ESI vs. an LIE is different, though.She does seem Gamma to me, and as for her likeability, well, she had me at "Do you want a blowjob?".
P.S.
OK, I just watched "Gillian Anderson kisses David Letterman" in the OP's first post, and I could totally understand his reaction to her. I find her extremely hot. Letterman is LIE, but I'm not really sure if Anderson is also LIE. Gamma, yes, but Gillian seems a bit too emotionally expressive to be LIE. The female LIE's I have met are more emotionally flat, like, "I hate stupid people, and the odds are pretty good that you are stupid, too. Now convince me you are not. If you can." Granted, LIE's can come off as assholes, and it looks like Gillian isn't bad at that, but duals can sometimes look like each other.
You can see how hard I'm trying to shoehorn her into the ESI category.
ESI thinks people are stupid for being ethically wrong and they can be very outspoken about that, so they can be seen as assholes for being "unfun". I don't see this in Gillian. The most Fi she's displayed so far is in that letter. You could also argue the letter is her realizing she needs stronger ethics (Fi) and a tangible way of getting and asserting them (Se).
LIE > ESI > LSE IMO
I think Letterman is SLI.
Yeah, she can whip me.
Originally Posted by Adam Strange
lol and I talk about it more than her
And ya I don't think it's JUST a delta thing
I have to agree she seems too groundbreaking for LSE. It could just be sx and the fact that if she IS LSE then she's the first sx one I've seen. But I like her too much and I've never liked LSEs, just slightly appreciated things about them at most.
David Duchovny, who she worked with, is something Ij and their relationship is closer to duality than anything else.
Taking it a little too literally?
What do you think she is? Don't say IEI.ESI for her is a joke
Last edited by flames; 07-21-2016 at 10:35 PM. Reason: fuckin spellinggg
・゚*✧ 𝓘 𝓌𝒾𝓁𝓁 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒶𝒸𝒸𝑒𝓅𝓉 𝒶 𝓁𝒾𝒻𝑒 𝓘 𝒹𝑜 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒹𝑒𝓈𝑒𝓇𝓋𝑒 ✧*:・゚
So, you think he's LIE? I don't know much about him and I haven't watched many episodes of his show and when I have it was always for the guest star. But he's a little bland for LIE, save for how he flirts with the women that go on his show. I don't think LIE is all that emotionally flexible either. But if your definition of 'emotionally flexible' is "not boring", then, yeah, LIE beats SLI there. I'm guessing you know more about him than I do, but you don't have to explain, though. I'm just curious.
・゚*✧ 𝓘 𝓌𝒾𝓁𝓁 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒶𝒸𝒸𝑒𝓅𝓉 𝒶 𝓁𝒾𝒻𝑒 𝓘 𝒹𝑜 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒹𝑒𝓈𝑒𝓇𝓋𝑒 ✧*:・゚
ESI
she's dating Chris martin? he's LSE
-
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
I actually want her to be my conflictor I can't say she's amusing or attractive in any way, nope I don't like her. >_>
edit: course that could just be alpha vs gamma values here, from watching her speak and looking at her quotes I can say she'd hate me and we'd have nothing to talk about, booring.
edit:Awwhhh <3 thank you Gillian Anderson... but see I guess that's where we conflict. She has Se I don't. :'(I hope everyone that is reading this is having a really good day. And if you are not, just know that in every new minute that passes you have an opportunity to change that.
What was said is appropriate for Se types, but not Si.
Si types are not dictatorship and rough as it was described by Silke. Compared to Se types we respect free will (Ne) in more degree and also use physical punishment lesser, to use such images.
look aboveWhat do you think she is? Don't say IEI.
Chris Martin - N type
Dave Letterman seems like an EIE to me.
-
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
She has a potty mouth.
-
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
lmao
・゚*✧ 𝓘 𝓌𝒾𝓁𝓁 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒶𝒸𝒸𝑒𝓅𝓉 𝒶 𝓁𝒾𝒻𝑒 𝓘 𝒹𝑜 𝓃𝑜𝓉 𝒹𝑒𝓈𝑒𝓇𝓋𝑒 ✧*:・゚
Delta ST, LSE-Te imo. That Ni PoLR moment at 5:22.
She could be LSE I'll watch the video when I get home
-
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