i've been typed eii on 16t, but i relate to aspects of the esi profile as well, so i decided to do some digging on the two types to distinguish the main differences between them, and that's when i came across the esi uncovered profile. it made me uncomfortable, to say the least, which is expected, given the purpose of the profiles - but it felt much harsher than the other ones. so i decided to read the more neutral esi profile, from the same site, but i noticed the same thing there as well. i didn't find anything particularly positive in the profile to counter the negativity presented in the uncovered profile, aside from their protectiveness and occasional tidiness. i thought i was being biased at first, but, after doing some more digging, there is a clear difference between how esi are portrayed vs how other types are portayed.

i like to think there's some good in everybody and, even if it turns out i'm not esi, i know a few confirmed ones, and i don't like how they're portrayed in type profiles. my least favorite would probably be stratiyevskaya's description(s), which is odd, considering she herself is one. what kind of strength is, "esi are good at picking out flaws and faults"?

(skip here for questions) where does the negative stigma come from, exactly? is it an issue of others mistyping people who are *insert negative stereotypes that may or may not be reflected in reality here* as esi, or is my mind playing tricks on me? there's a possibility i'm seeing something that isn't there, but i don't think so.