Quote Originally Posted by UDP View Post
The irony is that I find all of this fitting into the same general slate of stereotyping that you are basically trying to be against, above.
I wasn't saying the theory/stereotypes are completely/180-degrees wrong. Just trying to point out the imperfections in practice

I don't think many of these generalities really hold or are worth analyzing or drawing much from. I can see that being a trend and even a reality, but it's sort of like... what is the point, other than justifying someone's dismay or hopelessness.
Quote Originally Posted by paranoid View Post
it seems like something self-proclaimed intuitives tell themselves to make themselves feel better for being unattractive/not doing well in the dating game.
Guuuys why did this thread turn kind of hostile

Medusa and I weren't trying to say LSEs are dumb or shallow, just that things don't click between LSEs and EIIs right from the beginning necessarily, for numerous possible reasons, which is true of all dual relations, especially between people who haven't trained themselves to look for their dual. This is just providing another angle to consider in response to OP's question so that we have a variety of perspectives in the thread.

My LSE best friend is one of the most woke people I've ever met, and he took care of me in a crisis during which no one else was there for me, none of my EII best friends even, so I know LSEs aren't dumb or shallow. But the Te/Se world is different from the Fi/Ni world so an LSE who doesn't know socionics wouldn't immediately notice and like an EII (or vice versa). (DarkAngelFireWolf69's Model G defines types through their 4-D IEs, so there's also a theory that stipulates the importance of Se for LSEs.)

I'm sure I sound like I'm beating a dead horse now, but I think we can all agree that all types have awesome people, and duality is cool but not super smooth and perfect.