EII-LSE Duality Relations (INFj-ESTj)

[Shytan]

How are EIIs naturally built for LSEs, in terms of appearance, behaviour and traits?

[Adam Strange]

Quick response, EII's prefer LSE's over LIE's because LSE's are perfectionists and they respect the law.

LIE's respect the law as long as it doesn't get in our way.*

*As told to me by an EII secretary, who knows both LIE's and LSE's.


EDIT

Wait, you asked what LSE's see in EII's. Dunno, unless it is someone who keeps them from doing or saying stupid social things.

I was in a lunchroom with my LSE buddy and his boss was talking about the different kinds of bosses. He said, "Some bosses are more strict than others, some are more lenient." My LSE buddy looked up from his soup at his boss and said "And some bosses are assholes" and went back to his soup.
His boss's face turned beet red.
My LSE buddy didn't notice he'd said anything awkward at all.

[UDP]

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...Stratiyevskaya
here's one profile - not even the greatest im sure but it is one

[UDP]

Ah yes - all LSE are candyass boyscouts who dumb jocks and eII love them because they never do anything wrong on purpose



"My LSE buddy didn't notice he'd said anything awkward at all. "
sounds a lot more like being So last
or
not actually having Fe role

[Rebelondeck]

Duality doesn't come with a guiding light. It's the only pairing where one partner is the least likely to tread on the others turf, and each provide processing perspectives that the other needs and fundamentally understands even though many will never acknowledge their blind spots. The attraction is intellectual but most never see beyond their own egos or hang-ups so perception frequently remains superficial, and physical appearance and attraction are separate issues that can easily reduce intellectual objectivity. Perception may deepen with age but many will remain myopic; most can find a mate but not a partner. Also, I've noted that dual pairings seem less common for the self-confident who think themselves already successful and having a partner isn't much of a consideration.

a.k.a. I/O

[Adam Strange]

Duality doesn't come with a guiding light. It's the only pairing where one partner is the least likely to tread on the others turf, and each provide processing perspectives that the other needs and fundamentally understands even though many will never acknowledge their blind spots. The attraction is intellectual but most never see beyond their own egos or hang-ups so perception frequently remains superficial, and physical appearance and attraction are separate issues that can easily reduce intellectual objectivity. Perception may deepen with age but many will remain myopic; most can find a mate but not a partner. Also, I've noted that dual pairings seem less common for the self-confident who think themselves already successful and having a partner isn't much of a consideration.

a.k.a. I/O

This is generally brilliant, but I think duality forms between people who know who they are and what they need. Less so between people who are living someone else's life.

[Hope]

LSEs like the "classical feminine beauty", I've seen a lot of EIIs looking like that, I mean, long hair, cute dress, soft voice...that kind of stuff. LSEs also like the typical feminine traits, like cooking, decoration, kindness... the -I like to please others- kind of chick etc. LSEs males also like to portray the typical masculine attitudes and to be in charge (take all the decisions, etc). Not all the girls can stand that, enjoy pleasing others or have that kind of look. They also like to feel intellectually superior, so a know it all is not really their option.

The typical girl who would admire his intelligence, who would wait for him at home, while cook the dinner and fold his socks. If she has artistic tendencies and read about politics, its a plus.

[UDP]

LSEs like the "classical feminine beauty", I've seen a lot of EIIs looking like that, I mean, long hair, cute dress, soft voice...that kind of stuff. They also like the typical feminine traits, like cooking, decoration, kindness... the -I like to please others- kind of chick etc. LSEs males also like to portray the typical masculine attitudes and to be in charge (take all the decisions, etc). Not all the girls can stand that, enjoy pleasing others or have that kind of look. They also like to feel intellectually superior, so a know it all is not really their option.

The typical girl who would admire his intelligence, who would wait for him at home, while cook the dinner and fold his socks. If she has artistic tendencies and read about politics, its a plus.

Honestly this mostly works for me.
I think there is a kind of unfair disparity gender wise because gender roles for male LSE are sooooo stereotypical, etc.

I don't expect anyone to fold my socks or "wait at home for me" - go out and live your life. But yeah artistic and creative NFs, intellecualism, "Bookish", nerdy, "educated",.... I think Belle from beauty and the beast - including the new one - works for all of that. Not that she is particularly having to be EII, but she exudes a lot of delta qualities, if not progressively so, but still fit with the above things.

Also not all LSE want to just "wear the pants all the time" in the sense of having a doormat for a partner, but I think externally and superficially it can be that way. I think for both delta NFs if not more so EII, they will tolerate or enjoy someone taking command in the pragmatic sense, but EIIs, when healthy, will only accept someone's "command" that is respectful and considerate... and generally open to growth or personal development.

Delta NFs.... tend to become frustrated if people can't show some growth. LSE that is in touch with himself and realizes things can do this. But it is absolutely the case that just because a dual is 'present' in your life, you will not grow just from their radiation.

[Hope]

Honestly this mostly works for me.
I think there is a kind of unfair disparity gender wise because gender roles for male LSE are sooooo stereotypical, etc.

I don't expect anyone to fold my socks or "wait at home for me" - go out and live your life. But yeah artistic and creative NFs, intellecualism, "Bookish", nerdy, "educated",.... I think Belle from beauty and the beast - including the new one - works for all of that. Not that she is particularly having to be EII, but she exudes a lot of delta qualities, if not progressively so, but still fit with the above things.

Also not all LSE want to just "wear the pants all the time" in the sense of having a doormat for a partner, but I think externally and superficially it can be that way. I think for both delta NFs if not more so EII, they will tolerate or enjoy someone taking command in the pragmatic sense, but EIIs, when healthy, will only accept someone's "command" that is respectful and considerate... and generally open to growth or personal development.

Delta NFs.... tend to become frustrated if people can't show some growth. LSE that is in touch with himself and realizes things can do this. But it is absolutely the case that just because a dual is 'present' in your life, you will not grow just from their radiation.

I understand everything what you are saying (it sounds like something that my LSE dad would say), but you should know that most of my observations are satirical exaggerations and shouldn't be taken so seriously.

On the other hand, The Beauty and the Beast is my fav. princess tale but I didn't watch the movie because I hate Emma Watson and all her blurb and propaganda.

[ooo]

LSEs like the "classical feminine beauty", I've seen a lot of EIIs looking like that, I mean, long hair, cute dress, soft voice...that kind of stuff. They also like the typical feminine traits, like cooking, decoration, kindness... the -I like to please others- kind of chick etc. LSEs males also like to portray the typical masculine attitudes and to be in charge (take all the decisions, etc). Not all the girls can stand that, enjoy pleasing others or have that kind of look. They also like to feel intellectually superior, so a know it all is not really their option.

The typical girl who would admire his intelligence, who would wait for him at home, while cook the dinner and fold his socks. If she has artistic tendencies and read about politics, its a plus.

this look is all Fe to me, such a poser, what's that fake smile? ESE

[Hope]

this look is all Fe to me, such a poser, what's that fake smile? ESE

Its an ironical reference of their expectations.
Not that they'll get that irl.
Anyway, compare Emma Watson with the girl on the pic, for example. I see not so much difference.







On the other hand, yes, I've seen a lot of LSEs going for ESEs (but I don't think that any of them are ESE, imo ).

[VenusRose]

LSEs like the "classical feminine beauty",

hmm...

I've seen a lot of EIIs looking like that, I mean, long hair, cute dress, soft voice...that kind of stuff.

Well, I am like this. Though I wouldn't say I am like the picture. I have a sadder, melancholic offbeat "4" vibe.

LSEs also like the typical feminine traits, like cooking, decoration, kindness...

I am terrible at cooking lol and still haven't learned the patience to do so properly. I absolutely value compassion and sincerity/honesty and would not want to be that close to someone who does not. I do have my own taste in things, and I like being able to express myself that way so perhaps "decoration" can count under that...though I have ideas I am myself a little too unconfident in which one is the right one to pursue.

the -I like to please others- kind of chick etc.

I would say I don't like getting into unnecessary confrontations and do sometimes have a hard time saying "no" sometimes to certain people, can be rather shy and timid at times etc. but I don't really see it as "I like to please others" sort of thing.

LSEs males also like to portray the typical masculine attitudes and to be in charge (take all the decisions, etc).

Doesn't sound terrible to me if done in the right way, I can be pretty "yielding" but also extremely stubborn about certain things that matter to me. So not all the decisions would go over to my other half...
At the same time, I don't like the idea of a very traditional and boring dynamic. More than anything though, I tend to focus on SX when it comes to relationships (chemistry, intensity, connection stuff) rather than things people do for someone they care about (SP) or what they look like to others (SO).

Not all the girls can stand that, enjoy pleasing others or have that kind of look.

I wouldn't really describe myself as enjoying pleasing others, I think I enjoy pushing against the norm or convention and giving voice to something new, creative, exciting...And I love when others are able to do the same, to be themselves, to be passionate, and to freely talk about what matters to them.

They also like to feel intellectually superior, so a know it all is not really their option.

Haha, I think I prefer intellectual equality more than any other option as it pertains to this.

The typical girl who would admire his intelligence, who would wait for him at home, while cook the dinner and fold his socks. If she has artistic tendencies and read about politics, its a plus.

Well he would probably admire my intelligence, and I his as well It would go both ways. Cooking dinner and folding socks sounds like a really boring dynamic and tbh I don't pay attention to those things lol chores annoy me. Though I would of course do my fair share...it just sounds boring though the way this dynamic is described. I have artistic tendencies and I would love someone who likes and appreciates that, maybe even has artistic tendencies himself
I don't care so much about politics.

[Sol]

I would say I don't like getting into unnecessary confrontations

While on practice you did it on this forum. You were senselessly rude. And then made strange demands to ban the ones who disagrees with you. You are conflicting by Fi types standards.
You may do not like this for sure and try to avoid them more than EIEs, for example. But you do conflicts without reasons, what EII are the least to do.

[UDP]

Also, I've noted that dual pairings seem less common for the self-confident who think themselves already successful and having a partner isn't much of a consideration.

I guess but that seems to imply that duality is more common for people who are less confident
and
I don't see that particularly being the case

[Rebelondeck]

I guess but that seems to imply that duality is more common for people who are less confident
and
I don't see that particularly being the case

Not all self-confident people are successful and not all successful people are self-confident. People who believe that they actually need help will spend more time looking for a true partner; one can call that lack of confidence or true insight. However, I've known many people who, even later in life, haven't looked for anything more than arm candy and or sexual gratification - both male and female. It just seems more prevalent among the so-called elite; 'need' drives the search for duality.

a.k.a. I/O

[UDP]

Not all self-confident people are successful and not all successful people are self-confident. People who believe that they actually need help will spend more time looking for a true partner; one can call that lack of confidence or true insight. However, I've known many people who, even later in life, haven't looked for anything more than arm candy and or sexual gratification - both male and female. It just seems more prevalent among the so-called elite; 'need' drives the search for duality.

a.k.a. I/O

...... among the elite?

Elite what?

[Rebelondeck]

People with more than sufficient money, power and or status.

...... among the elite?

Elite what?

[UDP]

How are EIIs naturally built for LSEs, in terms of appearance, behaviour and traits?

appearance uh sure they are all suuuuper attractive
behavior - they don't fuck things up with too much Fe ; they are not going to get in the way of sensory program or me taking action i want to take - outside of warnings or observations ; they monitor relationships more seriously and carefully

traits - you mean besides baking brownies ?

[UDP]

for a more serious and cross-gender list

appearance: stylish but conservative - often somewhat understated but generally not careless ; sometimes there is an element of 'not being perfectly done up' that some EIIs feel self conscious about yet for me (and I'd say most delta ST that are on the level) it's not a big deal at all - overt vanity or focus on appearance can be off putting even ; it's a difference between taking care of yourself and trying too hard and most EIIs seem to do the right balance naturally -IMO

behavior: a calmness and invitingness to 'share your world' as some profile says ; a sense of a moral compass ; and perhaps most of all a sense that relationships matter and the quality or that their meaning is important -- and that they actually act and live like it does

I think it is very easy for STs including delta STs to become lost in task orientation or the pursuit of certain objectives and feel like relational things loose relevance at times - this might be true for any 4D Te /1D Fi type - but for LSE their preferred method of being reminded often comes in the shape of EII's default settings ; someone who has strong intuition, is introverted and rational, and values Fi - is Fi dominant. In the negative sense, LSE can have trouble with internal meaning (NiFi things) and its expression into the real world and its relationships to others, outside of the practical or concrete concerns and achievements. So why EIIs work better is that they are the type most easily to actually see and link to their inner worlds without having things that get in the way -- for IEEs it can be their stronger 4D Fe and their lack of rationality about it ; for LII it's the lack of valuing Fi and their own want for Fe. EII is also more tolerable with TeSe being 4D from the LSE, as its done with valued, but rational, Si. So, EIIs in this sense have the most inherent staying power for close psychological distance. No, I don't think duality is magical, but I think mechanically speaking what I've described is why there is substance to it within the theory.

traits: considerate ; sensitive ; reliable ; dependable ; not prone to dramatics or making things more complicated than they should be ; generally 'intelligent' and thoughtful in approaching things ; not loud or obtrusive ; patient and tolerable of our shortcomings ;

[Beautiful sky]

for a more serious and cross-gender list

appearance: stylish but conservative - often somewhat understated but generally not careless ; sometimes there is an element of 'not being perfectly done up' that some EIIs feel self conscious about yet for me (and I'd say most delta ST that are on the level) it's not a big deal at all - overt vanity or focus on appearance can be off putting even ; it's a difference between taking care of yourself and trying too hard and most EIIs seem to do the right balance naturally -IMO

behavior: a calmness and invitingness to 'share your world' as some profile says ; a sense of a moral compass ; and perhaps most of all a sense that relationships matter and the quality or that their meaning is important -- and that they actually act and live like it does

I think it is very easy for STs including delta STs to become lost in task orientation or the pursuit of certain objectives and feel like relational things loose relevance at times - this might be true for any 4D Te /1D Fi type - but for LSE their preferred method of being reminded often comes in the shape of EII's default settings ; someone who has strong intuition, is introverted and rational, and values Fi - is Fi dominant. In the negative sense, LSE can have trouble with internal meaning (NiFi things) and its expression into the real world and its relationships to others, outside of the practical or concrete concerns and achievements. So why EIIs work better is that they are the type most easily to actually see and link to their inner worlds without having things that get in the way -- for IEEs it can be their stronger 4D Fe and their lack of rationality about it ; for LII it's the lack of valuing Fi and their own want for Fe. EII is also more tolerable with TeSe being 4D from the LSE, as its done with valued, but rational, Si. So, EIIs in this sense have the most inherent staying power for close psychological distance. No, I don't think duality is magical, but I think mechanically speaking what I've described is why there is substance to it within the theory.

traits: considerate ; sensitive ; reliable ; dependable ; not prone to dramatics or making things more complicated than they should be ; generally 'intelligent' and thoughtful in approaching things ; not loud or obtrusive ; patient and tolerable of our shortcomings ;

I would say that it’s the calmness that is inviting LSE to speak with them. EII in their “caring” nature can seem like they genuinely care for the wellbeing of others including strangers so it’s also that they are willing to listen and be a part of a community.

LSE attract EII more so in their logic and intelligence than of their willingness to help in tasks. We like to talk about ideas and world events so that’s where and LSE’s insights though sometimes wild is wonderful to experience.

Mind you LSE from their sheer observations of patterns in others especially others negative traits can come flying out or off the handle with blatant disregard for their attachment to the individual or the other person’s feelings so someone like an EII IS TOTALLY equipped to understand the nature of LSE and fire back at them in such a way as to shut this gage off without significantly ruining the relationship and also learn through rationality to avoid stepping on these eggshells. And, also reminding them when they are being total assess or being unfair.

Overall no matter the level of negative traits there are in EII and mind you my husband has observed and pointed out some in me which I don’t pay attention to there are far more positive traits in EII. One such trait is how gentle I am with my child and how much I will bust my ass in order for her to have a well rounded experience in a variety of fields and subject helping her to develop into her own person. Where if I left it to an LSE he wouldn’t be as interested as I am in taking her to dance, music, theater, nature hikes, learning about conservation; he would be o more at home or going to a picknick.

What are my flaws he said something that I totally forgot about.

Most things easily slide off my back and I forget about arguments easily.
I accept people for their flaws. I remember watching this video of a comparison between IEI and EII and remembering that I don’t have to have a perfect person because non such people exist and that I can take someone for some of their qualities and be happy with them. So I guess it has been a sense of acceptance of the LSE.

What United us weren’t any of these traits. They were the LSE who wanted to be free and experience freedom who took me on a motorcycle ride in the forest. This beautiful land and no one else around us. Who checked for my safety in the motorcycle; who buckled me in the safe way; who kept checking on me. This sense of safety gave me real security. It was also him who could eat the same things every day who was willing to try my numerous recipes (my Ne gets bored and looses interest in food); this let me be myself naturally. My numerous “missions” in life. When I cured a whole entire small village of kids of lice. He didn’t wink at this at all; maybe he felt something on the inside that he didn’t share with me but again it was somewhat of an acceptance of me.

He doesn’t tend to make moves that are not economical or financially feasible so if you can say “I can’t retire now because I’ll only have $1000 a month vrs $4000 when I retire” he will be able to calculate that and see it logically and let you make that move to work longer as opposed to bitching at you every day to retire now when he wants you all to himself. This bitching can be repetitive and annoying.

[Saoirse]

I would actually argue that EIIs are not naturally built for LSEs in terms of appearance/behavior/traits (nor are LSEs for EIIs, etc.). In my experience, it is usually the case that LSE does not really notice EII for a while. EII is usually nondescript, plain, quiet, unnoticed and gently supporting in social situations, while LSE is instinctively attracted to power, beauty, and status, people who are talking charismatically and in control. I also recall an obscure blog about an ESI and her LIE partner--she mentioned that at first he felt like he was "settling" for her because she was not as glamorous as the partners he was used to. I think something similar would apply to EII-LSE.

If EII shows dedicated interest and admiration (which does not always happen, because many EII/people in general aren't really attracted to their duals), only then does LSE start to take notice. This is true of romantic relationships or even same-gender platonic friendships (I literally drew a portrait of one of my classmates, an LSE woman, before we were friends). After this, what LSE likes is that EII is very genuine, guileless, honest, trustworthy, reliable. LSE likes feeling understood, and EII understands people better than most types. I also think LSE likes being reassured of his/her own morality, empathy, and compassion by EII for some reason, though that might be a post for another day.

In some ways, EII is naturally built for LSE, but in others ways, we are very much not built for LSEs. Some (perhaps lucky) people are naturally attracted to their dual, but I would argue this is not close to the majority.

[Delilah]

I would actually argue that EIIs are not naturally built for LSEs in terms of appearance/behavior/traits (nor are LSEs for EIIs, etc.). In my experience, it is usually the case that LSE does not really notice EII for a while. EII is usually nondescript, plain, quiet, unnoticed and gently supporting in social situations, while LSE is instinctively attracted to power, beauty, and status, people who are talking charismatically and in control. I also recall an obscure blog about an ESI and her LIE partner--she mentioned that at first he felt like he was "settling" for her because she was not as glamorous as the partners he was used to. I think something similar would apply to EII-LSE.

If EII shows dedicated interest and admiration (which does not always happen, because many EII/people in general aren't really attracted to their duals), only then does LSE start to take notice. This is true of romantic relationships or even same-gender platonic friendships (I literally drew a portrait of one of my classmates, an LSE woman, before we were friends). After this, what LSE likes is that EII is very genuine, guileless, honest, trustworthy, reliable. LSE likes feeling understood, and EII understands people better than most types. I also think LSE likes being reassured of his/her own morality, empathy, and compassion by EII for some reason, though that might be a post for another day.

In some ways, EII is naturally built for LSE, but in others ways, we are very much not built for LSEs. Some (perhaps lucky) people are naturally attracted to their dual, but I would argue this is not close to the majority.

I usually agree with the content of your posts and this too is thought-provoking, yet i'd like to disagree in so far as the bolded. Ime when they can't achieve perfection the LSE will strive for balance so they might decide to forgo the appearances for the sake of content to balance things out, if anything you might find them ending up with LII rather than someone who's got the bolded going for them (power, beauty, status, charisma etc)

[Saoirse]

I usually agree with the content of your posts and this too is thought-provoking, yet i'd like to disagree in so far as the bolded. Ime when they can't achieve perfection the LSE will strive for balance so they might decide to forgo the appearances for the sake of content to balance things out, if anything you might find them ending up with LII rather than someone who's got the bolded going for them (power, beauty, status, charisma etc)

I guess it would depend on the context. I was thinking more of an average LSE in a group social context, like a party, conference, or class. I don't think LSE would notice L/EII on such occasions unless they already became close from another previous context (or LSE is a socionist, heh ). You say "when they can't achieve perfection"--I've found that when LSE is frustrated, that might actually be when he turns to EII the most, as EII soothes his ego and reassures him. Theoretically I could see him going to LII too, though I haven't noticed this personally. Either way, when an LSE thinks he's hot shit, he thinks he deserves a more showy partner... Kind of like what @Rebelondeck was saying earlier in this thread about those who are more self-confident being less likely to end up with a dual.

Though, I balk at the suggestion that the search for a true partner is driven only by self-perceived need. I would prefer to think of it as driven by maturity since it is ultimately probably more fulfilling than just having arm candy/sex partners, though maybe diff types/people are fulfilled by diff things.

Maybe there's some kind of inverted U shape in duality-seeking as a function of confidence. The very low confidence people and very high confidence people are likely not as mentally healthy/mature as the more moderate confidence people (but maybe the peak is around a little above average confidence).

[Rebelondeck]

@Economist, one key sign of maturity is being able to distinguish ones actual needs from one desires. Many with ideal partners are not mature, and many without are. Yes, fulfillment is a perception.....

a.k.a. I/O

[Wulzirik]

EIIs are so whiny and queer

I know this girl who is EII. Very pretty. But she's always "wah wah wah" "it's not right" "my morals are wounded" "I'm a butthurt snowflake"

Get a grip and toughen up

[Myst]

I guess it would depend on the context. I was thinking more of an average LSE in a group social context, like a party, conference, or class. I don't think LSE would notice L/EII on such occasions unless they already became close from another previous context (or LSE is a socionist, heh ). You say "when they can't achieve perfection"--I've found that when LSE is frustrated, that might actually be when he turns to EII the most, as EII soothes his ego and reassures him. Theoretically I could see him going to LII too, though I haven't noticed this personally. Either way, when an LSE thinks he's hot shit, he thinks he deserves a more showy partner... Kind of like what @Rebelondeck was saying earlier in this thread about those who are more self-confident being less likely to end up with a dual.

The LSEs I've known didn't focus on Se like this. Si perfection isn't the Se showiness. A LSE girl I know is engaged to LII friend of mine. (LSE-Si, LII-Ne)

[Saoirse]

The LSEs I've known didn't focus on Se like this. Si perfection isn't the Se showiness. A LSE girl I know is engaged to LII friend of mine. (LSE-Si, LII-Ne)

I understand the difference between Si- and Se-valuing in theory, but in practice, LSEs and SLEs have the same dimensionality to all their functions and live in "the same world" more than LSEs and EIIs do. In my first post in this thread, I acknowledged that EIIs might be "naturally built" for LSEs in more long-term scenarios, but I don't think EIIs are "naturally built" to catch the eye of LSEs in the short run. I would say the same of LIIs and LSEs. I'm not the first person to think this is a feature of duality.
@Cassandra, would appreciate hearing your thoughts on this matter if you have the time

[AbZero]

I would actually argue that EIIs are not naturally built for LSEs in terms of appearance/behavior/traits (nor are LSEs for EIIs, etc.). In my experience, it is usually the case that LSE does not really notice EII for a while. EII is usually nondescript, plain, quiet, unnoticed and gently supporting in social situations, while LSE is instinctively attracted to power, beauty, and status, people who are talking charismatically and in control. I also recall an obscure blog about an ESI and her LIE partner--she mentioned that at first he felt like he was "settling" for her because she was not as glamorous as the partners he was used to. I think something similar would apply to EII-LSE.

How did you come to that conclusion? Your description of LSEs sounds suspiciously more like SLEs. LSEs are primarily oriented towards productivity more than anything else. Their flaws tend to be more related to anger than status orientation from what I've seen. And talking charismatically would be right? This seems like a very odd description of LSEs to be honest.

Additional Note: I mean anger mostly in the sense of frustration that things aren't running efficiently

[UDP]

I would actually argue that EIIs are not naturally built for LSEs in terms of appearance/behavior/traits (nor are LSEs for EIIs, etc.). In my experience, it is usually the case that LSE does not really notice EII for a while. EII is usually nondescript, plain, quiet, unnoticed and gently supporting in social situations, while LSE is instinctively attracted to power, beauty, and status, people who are talking charismatically and in control. I also recall an obscure blog about an ESI and her LIE partner--she mentioned that at first he felt like he was "settling" for her because she was not as glamorous as the partners he was used to. I think something similar would apply to EII-LSE.

If EII shows dedicated interest and admiration (which does not always happen, because many EII/people in general aren't really attracted to their duals), only then does LSE start to take notice. This is true of romantic relationships or even same-gender platonic friendships (I literally drew a portrait of one of my classmates, an LSE woman, before we were friends). After this, what LSE likes is that EII is very genuine, guileless, honest, trustworthy, reliable. LSE likes feeling understood, and EII understands people better than most types. I also think LSE likes being reassured of his/her own morality, empathy, and compassion by EII for some reason, though that might be a post for another day.

In some ways, EII is naturally built for LSE, but in others ways, we are very much not built for LSEs. Some (perhaps lucky) people are naturally attracted to their dual, but I would argue this is not close to the majority.

I guess.........................


I've always been very "heterosexual" about my attraction, even from early in life. I don't mean gender wise, I mean, attracted to things different than me. I've been physically attracted to some SLI women, but in general, ST women aren't appealing to me in their looks or their activities or presence. They feel similar to me and that's fine.

I was always drawn to for lack of better term, people who were emotionally intuitive. In large part, because I'm not. I have awareness, but I was very lopsided away from that. Even earlier in life when I was more reserved and repressed (and subsequently attracted more 4d Fe people), it was heavily slanted towards, outside of a few ENFx that I did get romantically close to, IXFx, basically. A large marjority of my long-standing friends are actually 4d Fi people.

The person I've been most attracted to in my entire life was EII and the runner up was actually in terms of physicality, LII and IEE, a tie probably.


Sure, I can see how in the most basic superficial way, LSE or any "typical male" will "overlook EIIs" easily, but....


EII have notorious "feeling overlooked" stuff that kind of fucks them up, IMO. They get depressed about this often, and seem to buy into the hype after certain amount of disappointments. My advice - don't buy into the negative hype.

[Delilah]

I'd like to jump in and say LSE are extremely critical and some of this might show in their relations, incl. duality, however they're the hardest on themselves so someone who can bring them out of that near-funk in non-obtrusive ways is highly appreciated; I also agree with @UDP spot on about the search for meaning, ime.

[Bertrand]

the problem is beauty, power, status (especially the first) are almost "attractive" by definition

my latest theory is my dad is LSE and my mother is ESE and he was attracted to her precisely because of how she turned heads as well as her social status when they were young (they frequently tell stories saying this)

the thing is SLE is even moreso, so the words could apply to either/or and not be wrong but at the same time could also be misleading for the reasons you point out

the deal is too, they both have that 4d Te its just one is conscious and the other unconscious, anecdotally you could think of situations where they are both explicit or implicit in their actions so it comes down to nuance and trends over time. SLE extracts heightened benefit in what they do subconsciously via understanding things in a thorough Ti sense and proceeding accordingly, whereas LSE thinks explicitly about the Te factors and generally develops a Ti understanding as a consequence of his endeavors, etc

for my dad, when younger, you could also say he still had his 4d se moments; especially as a youngster, I think LSE comes off a little more SLE sometimes (not every time, some are responsible from the get-go but others, especially at a young age tend to be a little more wild)

the problem is people reference singular acts or situations because they really don't have time to write a novel and its true those atomic acts could be susceptible to more than one interpretation along typological lines

i really do think then that intuition of time becomes a strong factor in discerning type for the aforementioned reasons (stable patterns over time essentially are type, from the point of view of diagnosis)

[AbZero]

the problem is beauty, power, status (especially the first) are almost "attractive" by definition

my latest theory is my dad is LSE and my mother is ESE and he was attracted to her precisely because of how she turned heads as well as her social status when they were young (they frequently tell stories saying this)

the thing is SLE is even moreso, so the words could apply to either/or and not be wrong but at the same time could also be misleading for the reasons you point out

the deal is too, they both have that 4d Te its just one is conscious and the other unconscious, anecdotally you could think of situations where they are both explicit or implicit in their actions so it comes down to nuance and trends over time. SLE extracts heightened benefit in what they do subconsciously via understanding things in a thorough Ti sense and proceeding accordingly, whereas LSE thinks explicitly about the Te factors and generally develops a Ti understanding as a consequence of his endeavors, etc

for my dad, when younger, you could also say he still had his 4d se moments; especially as a youngster, I think LSE comes off a little more SLE sometimes (not every time, some are responsible from the get-go but others, especially at a young age tend to be a little more wild)

the problem is people reference singular acts or situations because they really don't have time to write a novel and its true those atomic acts could be susceptible to more than one interpretation along typological lines

i really do think then that intuition of time becomes a strong factor in discerning type for the aforementioned reasons (stable patterns over time essentially are type, from the point of view of diagnosis)

You have a point, sure LSEs will use their demonstrative. Though it seems a little problematic to infer general type traits from one specific instance. At that point you have to wonder whether the trait is type related or not. Maybe some are interested in social status and sure beauty seems pretty much universally appealing. It just seems a little strange to describe LSEs primarily through and (or at least what is associated with those functions).

[UDP]

[Hope]

I'm glad to see that you have a lot of respect for women and the depth of your thoughts. You are a great example of why ppl like Emma and her blurb is useless and the exact same reason of why I'm against that propaganda. Hypocrisy and a bunch of fans clapping like horny seals just because they like her face.

[UDP]

I'm glad to see that you have a lot of respect for women. You are a great example of why ppl like Emma and her blurb is useless and the exact same reason of why I'm against that propaganda. Hypocrisy and a bunch of fans clapping like horny seals just because they like her face.

You sound bitter.

Do you want to say more?

[Hope]

You sound bitter.

You are not the right person to say that, bro.

Do you want to say more?

That depends, do you want some more?

[UDP]

You are not the right person to say that, bro.




That depends, do you want some more?

I don't actually think you're talking to me, just sort of this image of how people support or dislike emma watson or what she represents / to you.

[UDP]

actually, seeing this again..
@Economist
"LSE is instinctively attracted to power, beauty, and status, people who are talking charismatically and in control"

That sounds so..... beta....? Or, enneagram 3?
I do like people that are doing significant things, but, that sounds mostly like an EII's worst fears about being inadequate than what I would say LSEs are 'instinctively attracted to".

I will differentiate noticing shiny things vs attraction. Do I notice all of the above? Sure I do. Is that what I want in a partner? Not necessarily. Beauty - why not. Charismatic talking? Less so. "status and power".... I don't feel they have much bearing on whether or not someone can give me what I want relationally.


Specifically "charismatic speaking" sounds unappealing. I don't want a PMA self-help motivational speaker 24/7, I think I'd rather be put off by that. I am not attracted to people who constantly try boost or alter my moods, I'm rather decidedly against that. That's probably what I like most about Fi dominants is that the are more "honest" even wrt their Fi and Fe ..... IEEs can be... more misleading or less concerned about the implication of some of their expressions. Etc etc etc. Anecdotes aside, I'm very ok with non-charismatic NFness that tends to come from EIIs.

I do notice a kind of "aversion to power" that EIIs have, which I think can be superficially offputting or weird in one sense. But what matters more to me, or what seems more the case, is that EIIs don't shirk their responsibilities. I think they might not necessarily "like" the pressure or spotlight of certain situations, but I've seen them be much steadier than most. I feel basically like if you offer them Se/Te support they will are very competent at organizing events, conducting research groups, planning trips, and everything else. If you keep people's petty pressures off of them, they seem to excel, even.


And regarding beauty,
I do know some LSE who are very stereotypical in their assessment of beauty.
I know some who aren't.

Again, I have been told and observed MANY EII who basically feel... inferior , whatever they do. They seem to point to an over idealized example of hair and makeup and perfect photographed smiles, and say oh I'm just not beautiful. A lot of people don't care if you don't put THAT much effort into things. I even prefer not to, to an extent. I don't like gaudy, over the top things. Subdued style, good taste, etc, that's always been more appealing .

I can understand how delta NFs might feel more pressure to "show" or "do more" than they have, but trust me in that anyone who is substantial enough for a deeper relationship will be able to see through that.


Also, as soon as someone understands that delta NFS are closeted hedonists, the cat is out of the bag. Outside of all their morality they like pleasure and like to be naked, too. I actually dated a delta NF woman who explained why she didn't buy a lot of fancy underwear was due to her simply not spending a lot of time with it on. I think there's an element of not-extensive effort about things, and that's fine.


I can agree that sure, there is, in the most superficial way, differences, between all of the duals even. But I don't think it means that "instinctively" people are drawn to very different things. I would think culture , enneagram, and some other factors play into the nature of attraction, more so, even.

[Saoirse]

actually, seeing this again..
@Economist
"LSE is instinctively attracted to power, beauty, and status, people who are talking charismatically and in control"

That sounds so..... beta....? Or, enneagram 3?
I do like people that are doing significant things, but, that sounds mostly like an EII's worst fears about being inadequate than what I would say LSEs are 'instinctively attracted to".

Sure, maybe I generalized too much from my LSE 3 so/sp friend, and I am on the insecure side. 3 and social-first are common in enneagram types for LSEs though, so it's still relevant. Relations often don't work as stipulated in socionics theory, due to enneagram and idiosyncrasies, or even just the limits of current socionics theory, so I think it's useful not to get too caught up in stereotyping or over-romanticizing dual relations.

Edit: or due to societal reasons as @Medusa points out above

I also want to re-emphasize I think it's more of a problem for initial encounters/short-term situations. I really don't think LSEs, power-hungry enneagram type or not, are instinctively drawn to/pick out EIIs at a party/in a class and try to talk to them (unless the LSEs are ones who are into socionics). But if they see an EII working hard, being reliable & trustworthy, demonstrating good sense--over a substantial period of time (which is hard cos often there's no reason for them to keep interacting for that long)--then they might notice and like them more.

[UDP]

Sure, maybe I generalized too much from my LSE 3 so/sp friend, and I am on the insecure side. 3 and social-first are common in enneagram types for LSEs though, so it's still relevant. Relations often don't work as stipulated in socionics theory, due to enneagram and idiosyncrasies, or even just the limits of current socionics theory, so I think it's useful not to get too caught up in stereotyping or over-romanticizing dual relations.

Mm, well I'm "post-duality" as of several years ago, so, I don't really have those concerns I guess. I'm not attempting to defend an image of duality, rather, offer counterpoints to what is being said.

as far as "Relations often don't work as stipulated in socionics", I would argue that the profiles expressing particular pre-determined outcome for relationships are misguided and only useful in the context of explaining psychological lopsidedness and related stresses, mhm.

I also want to re-emphasize

Re-emphasize all you want.

I think it's more of a problem for initial encounters/short-term situations. I really don't think LSEs, power-hungry enneagram type or not, are instinctively drawn to/pick out EIIs at a party/in a class and try to talk to them (unless the LSEs are ones who are into socionics). But if they see an EII working hard, being reliable & trustworthy, demonstrating good sense--over a substantial period of time (which is hard cos often there's no reason for them to keep interacting for that long)--then they might notice and like them more.

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 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.

Yes, i think there is a default acclimation that takes place with all dualities, by nature of people being lopsided.