Just curious. I'm not into LSEs though, not at all.
Initial stage of dualization EII-LSE (INFj and ESTj duality)
Just curious. I'm not into LSEs though, not at all.
C-EII-INFj 4w3 Sx/sp 479
correctly identify own type, which is doubtful to be EII for you
I'm definitely EII. You can't automatically cancel out my type because I'm not naturally attracted to my duals, that's not how it works. I am attracted to the use of Te and Si in people, just not to LSEs in specific. Now, can you answer my question or not?Originally Posted by Sol
C-EII-INFj 4w3 Sx/sp 479
You behave strangely for EII.
I recommend to make the typing theme with video-interview to get your correct type. Maybe ENFP or other close, but not EII. Even your avatar is out of their taste.
yeah Shaebette, you seem great, but its hard for me to see EII
I feel like people just don't want to tell you because you seem so set on it. at least consider it
Yup, you're right. You're under no obligation to be attracted actually, freedom of choice - and so many other factors including experiences with certain types and situations. If I for instance like ILIs exclusively more, then I like them more and this is my unshakeable entitlement, and Socionics can't just tell me that I have to be SEE. Or that I have to get more acquainted with SLIs, or that I should like Si because it's an absolute must, and so on. It's like telling a gay person to like the opposite sex because all people are meant to be heterosexual!
Gotta make this a bit less compulsive and strict alright. And also, not so inevitable.
To answer the question, look into the stages and aspects here. Hope it helps!
I feel like physical attraction is not necessarily type related so how can anyone say they're not attracted to a whole entire type?
Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx
Of course one is naturally attracted to our duals. That's due the seeking function. That's an important part on typing, its even included in typing tests.
Now it doesn't mean that you must fall in love with every dual type you find or that you can't have relationships or be attracted to other types too. Those are completely different things.
But if you just switched j/p for making the conversion of your type from mbti to socionics for example, I'd suggest looking more carefully into types and else.
Also I dont understand what is your question.
Anyway, there are plenty of texts about duality in here http://wikisocion.net/
Was it really necessarily physical what she implied? There are myriads of other types of attractions. Ye know, thevariety
I assumed she meant physical since she mentioned she is attracted to the use of Si and Te in people....Was it really necessarily physical what she implied? There are myriads of other types of attractions. Ye know, the
But yes, of course,
Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx
yeah but shaebette said shes not into LSEs, at allWas it really necessarily physical what she implied? There are myriads of other types of attractions. Ye know, the
that seems odd for EII, precisely because even if she found other types physically attractive and hasn't yet found any particular LSE physically attractive (which could be normal), to rule them out categorically seems antithetical to the idea of dominant/dual seeking interaction
the flipside to that is, regardless of how "meant for" you are for you dual, you can find any type physically attractive. so to rule your dual out completely, even setting aside dual seeking interactions, is weird because there's gotta be at least one physical manifestation of any type you find attractive, even if you haven't run into any because type is not really linked to physical attraction--its pretty random at bottom
in other words, none of this adds up
so there's really two problems:
1) ruling any type out, dual or not, seems weird, because at the very least there's physical attraction
2) ruling your dual out specifically seems weird, because in spite of lack of physical attraction, there should be other forms of attraction at work (which is how duality is defined)
in other words, if you're not attracted to your dual in some way on a mental level, even if they're not your soulmate or whatever, then they're not your dual, because duality is defined by the experience of exactly this phenomenon
this idea that you're x type but you do not like your dual at all just leads inevitably to the conclusion that one of you is mistyped. or you're the walking damned for whom you have no real dual experience. if you have the "dual experience" with a different type, guess what?
however, the entire thing is constrained by time, and sometimes you don't recognize your attraction instantly, so a lot of it comes down to maybe letting yourself relax and be yourself in the presence of duals before writing them off
Last edited by Bertrand; 11-05-2017 at 07:20 PM.
It's not linked to objective beauty, but linked to sexual attraction.
We are more attracted by personally pleasant people of other sex. We may forgive them in more degree that their body is not completely in our taste, we may also adopt our taste to their body appearance. It's practically hard to find a young and healthy woman/man which can't be thought as attractive. When they are also "your dream" as persons - you'll like them. 80% of young/healthy people I suspect fit to minimum requirements of anyone, what's probably lesser noticable for non-Si types.
yeah, the bottom threshold is easy to meet, but compatible personality increases attractiveness, even from a distance because how people live is a reflection of their personality and influences their look to some degree
I'm pretty sure Shaebette is EII. I'm 100% EII and my closest friends are for sure EIIs, so I have a really good sense of the EII vibe. I'd be happy to see a typing video from Shaebette, just cuz I like her and would be curious to get to know her better, but I doubt it would make me think anything but EII. FWIW, 16t people mostly seemed to think I'm IEI or Alpha NT from my typing video, and there is basically no way I'm anything but EII. I think a lot of people here get too hung up on specific stereotypes (e.g., if an EII on average has characteristics A, B, and C, some people will focus too much on A and count someone out just for not having A, even if they have B and C).
I don't know how much people's desire to retype Shaebette comes just from her not liking LSEs, but I have to say that it is extremely normal for people not to like their duals, or at least for EIIs not to like LSEs. My 3 best EII friends are all solidly unattracted to LSEs, and one of them was even dualized early (grew up with an LSE mom). I probably liked LSEs the most out of all the EIIs I know, and even so, my current attitude toward them overall can best be described as "annoyed." This "psychological comfort from duality" stuff is a nice, dreamy theory, but if you don't update your theory to fit reality, you can't act as effectively in reality as you would be able to if you adapted to empirical evidence. IME, Socionics theory broadly got the "good relations" and "bad relations" categories right, but within those, it's pretty much a crapshoot as to which types a particular individual will love or hate the most.
Anyway, as for Shaebette's actual question, my experience of the initial stage is usually that I admire the LSE but the LSE doesn't notice me at first, but after I show how much I like the LSE, s/he warms up to me and starts confiding in me, etc. The initial stage is fine, I like the idea of making capable/powerful friends and think it's rather cute how much they seem to bask in my compliments, but it gets very painful very quick.
if you're not psychologically comforted by your dual then socionics loses all meaning. its not that you can't be an "EII who doesn't like your dual" it just means that EII represents nothing, because EII means liking LSE at its core
and EII who doesn't like your dual really just means x other type, which is what people are trying to steer you onto, because its more accurate. at no point do you change who you are or always have been
I'm sorry I don't behave like the typical EII to you @Sol, but my enneatype and DCNH subtype influence my sociotype greatly. As for your ENFP suggestion, Creative subtypes are observed to act more like their mirror type. I assure you and @Bertrand, I am EII. I am 100% sure of this
Oh and Sol, my avatar is a picture of me that was taken recently that I really like, I did have a problem getting it taken because I'm both shy/photophobic and attention- loving. Paradox of the 4 and 3. I think @Chae understands this very well, and it shouldn't make me any less of an EII.
Perhaps I'm not attracted to LSEs because I haven't spent a lot of time around them. There's one in my class, though, who's a total asshole. He's very organised,focused and dresses well yes, but he's too vocal and flirts with every girl (very touchy). He's also very political and can be hurtful. Some other LSEs I've met were the same way.
C-EII-INFj 4w3 Sx/sp 479
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org
Your behavior is too much out of borders for EII what means other type. The example, - EII are shy, while you are not.
There is nothing bad to be other type. The bad is - to think wrong type.
You may make a typing theme with a video and get what you need - the Holly Truth.
well, this is why I don't like enneagram, but at the same time I suppose anything is possible. Maybe you like LSEs, and the guy you ran into was either trying to be something he's not, or maybe he is actually some other type? For example I attribute touching with SLE: this video of Chris Pine is a good example of what I take to be gross Se expansion
There's a difference between being confident online and in person, I don't think you should make that conclusion about me having not met me in real life. Anywaaay I sure will, and then you can freely judge me from the videoYour behavior is too much out of borders for EII what means other type. The example, - EII are shy, while you are not.
There is nothing bad to be other type. The bad is - to think wrong type.
You may make a typing theme with a video and get what you need - the Holly Truth.
C-EII-INFj 4w3 Sx/sp 479
its true, I'm pathetic IRL
@Shaebette The initial stages of all dual relations are negative or neutral. It is only in the long term (months to years) that it becomes positive.
This is true for all quadra relations, but mostly for duality does this rule apply the most. So it depends on how much time you've spent with LSEs to judge if you are out of the norm or not for EIIs IMO.
“We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand.” Randy Pausch
Ne-IEE
6w7 sp/sx
6w7-9w1-4w5
So this also applies to mirror, activity and identical relations?
C-EII-INFj 4w3 Sx/sp 479
Yes, but to a lesser extent and with variation. Within quadra relations are recommended for LTRs because they are positive in the long term. Duality is the ideal of course, but the other three are acceptable as well.
Outside of quadra it gets tricky. Conflictors for instance look attractive to each other in the short term, but in the long term it will be disastrous. Neighboring quadra is preferable to opposing quadra for LTRs.
“We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand.” Randy Pausch
Ne-IEE
6w7 sp/sx
6w7-9w1-4w5
Duals generally are pleasant people, what makes the ones of opposite sex as interesting quickly.
You see her nicely smiling you, maybe also kindly and polite talking to you - that would be enough to get interest and to begin the process "how good is she in a romance". At least, your unconscious will begin this analysis what may lead you to some activity, which for some time you may rationalize by non-romantic factors only.
It's wrong when some say that duals are not attractive for significant initial time. If that dual is at least normal (smart, pretty), if he/she behaves naturaly for him/her - your attention will be catched. The other would be against our needs and hence our nature.
That proves my point. If someone is attracted to their dual initially it is because of non-Socionics reasons. The Socionics reasons come later. That can almost apply to any type though. This is why Socionics ITR is meant to predict the long term outcome of relationships and not the short term.
“We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand.” Randy Pausch
Ne-IEE
6w7 sp/sx
6w7-9w1-4w5
While I said the opposite to your opinion. Duality is the positive factor for attraction, not the negative or neutral - including initial stage. Duals are personally interesting and pleasant people - this makes them romantically attractive from the beginning.
Non-types factors may impede this. Like if you had romantic experience only with types far from duals, then you may seek for those types and ignore higher other types. Some people (P types especially) lesser seek for long relations, so they may choose wrong partners systematically and don't think their suffer with bad types as pathologic. This is easily fixed by informal/romantic communication with pretty duals/semiduals, - you'll get how good they are quickly and then will have lesser wish to repeat relations with inappropriate types - as you'll have base to compare your feelings. So deep and pleasant feelings like duals/semi-duals/activators no other type gives, - they are like to get bread when you are hungry for long. To understand the difference you need IRL experience, better a romance with them, not just to look at actors in Internet, or to watch/communicate with a couple mistyped ones somewhere.
> The Socionics reasons come later.
IR effects are felt from nonverbal already. You see a woman 1 minute, watch how she talks and smiles to someone, - notice how cute she is, and the process have started.
> This is why Socionics ITR is meant to predict the long term outcome of relationships and not the short term.
In long term relations the factor of IR becomes more important. But in short relations it works too, you may just lesser pay attention on it as mostly don't seek for deep soul support there. So even short relations with duals are more pleasant too.
the too vocal flirts with every girl thing might be attributed to being SLE insteador even SEE, especially the touch thing seems Se. (or just bad manners
What? EII? You come across as Fe valuing as all get out. It's nothing to be ashamed of.
I feel like starting a support group for us Fe valuers. =D
And why do you think I come off as an Fe valuer?
C-EII-INFj 4w3 Sx/sp 479
I bridge the gap by approaching LSE trying to be kind and trustworthy. Demonstrating friendship. They do the rest. If they want to have a friendship with me they will make the effort and put in the work by being the extrovert, by reaching out and asking me to join them
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 was just reading the Erotic Attitudes thread and was remembering an evening when I (an LIE) took an EII out to dinner.
We ate a late dinner at a nice place downtown, one of the best places, in fact, and she outshone all the other women there while being perfectly demure. Her conversation was funny and bright, her company was pleasant, and I was proud to be seen with her. She gave me the impression that she had prepared a smooth and artful path for us, and had been doing this her whole life. I can't explain that statement, but it's how I felt.
When we finished and walked back to our cars in the parking lot, she stood close and still in the moonlight and turned her face up to mine, and just waited for me to respond.
This is the point where it was clear that Semi-Duality is not Duality.
Adam, you put it so well and the sincerity is evident. What happened after this became clear to you?
It reminded me of the first time I intentionally pursued a Te-dominant person. It was summertime and I'd impulsively agreed to a 3-day camping trip. After arriving, I saw a man with a cowboy hat calling his doberman back to the campsite. I watched him with his buddies and he drew me in immediately with his intelligence, humor, and command. After bantering for a bit, we both moved around the campfire. I was listening to an older SLI and SLE talk about sailing when cowboy LIE came over and sat down on me. SLE made a joke about condoms and SLI left. I was greatly attracted to + also had no idea how to react to a 6' 2" tall man in my lap.
I found him passed out in his tent later and he and his doberman cuddled me until 6AM when I snuck out. The attraction was also physical on my part, but it didn't seem to translate naturally between the two of us.
Full disclosure: The EII is my secretary and we've been having lunch and dinner from time to time for ten years. For nine of those ten years, she was unhappily married (possibly to an ESE, certainly not to an LSE), then she got divorced last year.
I've told her about Socionics and why we are a sub-optimal pair, but she seems to have me in her sights anyway. I've shown her LSEs and she doesn't like them; she says they are pills (hard to take). I actually take her out because I like her and I can take her anywhere, but I'm not sexually attracted to her at all. Victim-Infantile is a very poor match, even if I can pretend to be a Caregiver sometimes.
We've talked a bit (it's been ten years!) about what we each like, sexually, and we could get along well enough in that department. But she's not a natural Aggressor.
To be honest, if I hadn't run across Socionics, I'd be cohabitating with her for sure, and possibly thinking of marriage. Everything I said about her in the first post is true: She's smart, hard-working, funny, and I can take her anywhere and be proud of her.
However, the problem with Semi-Duality is that neither she nor I can motivate the other person. We can ask, but they don't obey.
That's different with me and my ESI Duals. The easy relations are there, the admiration for the other person is there, and in addition with Duals, we actually listen closely to each other and respond correctly.
What you said here makes so much sense to me- the key part that I messed up on for 2 years is establishing trust and intimacy with a dual. IME, I had a skewed perspective. The interactions with semi-duals I have had were with generally solid people. For example, even though it's been difficult to collaborate with cowboy LIE, we have consistently supported each other for 3 years now. I've watched him go through women and find what works for him organically (he detests MBTI and doesn't want to look into socionics). On the other hand, he has seen me completely blunder with two duals who were not the right fit at all.
I had some serious reservations about duals after piss-poor experiences, but I get what you mean about asking without obedience. How have your experiences been with duals?
I'm an e8, so basically, no one tells me what to do. That's a kind of fundamental rule of mine, and the reason my marriage lasted so long with the SLI was that she never, ever told me what to do. She might suggest, or she might say she was going to do something, but she never tried to control me.
So I first consciously encountered an ESI Dual at a restaurant run by an IEI whom I was chasing, soon after my divorce. The IEI pretty much ignored me, so I'd end up talking to her employees, and one of them was super-easy to talk to. From her looks, I thought she might be an EII (this was early in my Socionics experience), but she turned out to be an ESI-Fi e4.
We talked at lunch for months, and I gradually realized that I got along a whole lot better with the employee than I did with her IEI boss, even though her boss was miles sexier and we'd go out on dates and things. Her IEI boss and I never really had an effortless interaction the way I did with the employee, and I told the employee about Socionics and she took a test and she said got ESI.
"No", I thought. "That can't be. She's plain*. I don't feel the lust towards her that I have in the past to the women I've bedded. How can she be a Dual and not inspire lust?"
But soon after that, the IEI was unloading cases of water bottles from her vehicle and the ESI, who knew exactly what her boss appreciated, told me to go help her.
By now, I wasn't feeling too favorably inclined towards the IEI. She had been deflecting my attentions for weeks, so I told the ESI "No."
"Go help her," she repeated.
"No," I repeated. "I don't feel like it."
We watched the IEI return to her vehicle for more water.
"Go help her," the ESI said, a third time.
Now I was pissed. I didn't want to lift a finger for the IEI, but I also found myself getting up and going over and picking up the cases of water and moving them inside. I couldn't believe I was doing this. "This is it. I'm done with this woman," meaning the IEI.
And after I finished moving the cases of water, the IEI became super friendly and sat down beside me and started being really nice to me.
I started to think about this.
One, I was unable to refuse the ESI's request. WTF was that about?
Two, the ESI had known her boss well enough to know that what she valued most in the whole world was physical help (Se). She did this without knowing one thing about Socionics.
Three, the ESI had told me to do the one thing that would make the IEI like me, even though the ESI really wanted me for herself. She never said that, but I could tell. How selfless is that? She was giving up her happiness to make me happy. Fuck.
At that point, the IEI disappeared from my horizon and the ESI got all my attention.
(We didn't become lovers or anything, even though she suggested getting a place together. For one thing, I am older than her father, whom I have met. For another, she was the first ESI I ever met, and how smart is it to nail yourself to the first passing car?)
*She was plain then. She's since lost weight, hit her style stride and now looks like a true babe. I was stupid.
Hell, I'm still stupid.
I feel that's a common misconception about duality - instant lust / desire / even liking. I don't think you're supposed to always feel butterflies or on a high when you're with a dual. It can happen, sure. But they don't tickle us quite the way other types can.
Oh, to find you in dreams - mixing prior, analog, and never-beens... facts slip and turn and change with little lucidity. except the strong, permeating reality of emotion.
Thanks for that, Adam. She sounds like a badass lady. The ESI middle age glow-up is so real!! And even though I don't know you IRL, you are not stupid
Reply With Quote
