I feel like men are supposed to play it cool and let thirsty women do most of them work nowadays. It’s usually only unattractive, socially inept men who resort to chasing/“aggressor tactics”
Is the male aggressor romantic-style outdated?
I feel like men are supposed to play it cool and let thirsty women do most of them work nowadays. It’s usually only unattractive, socially inept men who resort to chasing/“aggressor tactics”
Last edited by Averroes; 07-31-2020 at 02:39 PM.
Nah it's just obviously, a tall and (objectively) physically attractive man can get away with being more sexually aggressive whereas an uglier man cannot. But truly objectively handsome males don't do creepy things like that to offend women anyway, it's usually warthogs like Harvey Fierstein who do that type of stuff. So they are allowed to both 'play it cool' and be more forward. Of course it's unfair and cruel =/ but... that's life?
Also INFp women are like your very generic female based type woman. An INFp male is ultra 'weird' and an INFp female is ultra normie. Society pays attention to an INFp female being fucked by an ESTp male so much because it's easy to pay attention to it the same way it's easy to pay attention to a skinned knee. It's not the only type of relationship tho (even tho its probably the relationship that started it all in a primitive sense, heterosexually speaking)
Since it worked this way for me, you might be unironically right this time.
Being a caregiver seems ideal if you want a healthy relationship as an average guy. You’re fucked if you’re average and have a high sex drive or any kind of ego
Girls get horny too, and any normal-looking dude who approaches them can skip past their quality-control. He'll seem funny, or 'kind of cute', or whatever. While the rest of us are working or studying, there are guys who cruise around for sixteen hours a day looking for pussy. If you talk to hundreds girls, then, by the law of averages, at least one of them is going to have sex with you.
Last edited by xerx; 07-31-2020 at 06:54 PM.
Do you have proof of this?Originally Posted by xerxe
How many hundred?
Believe me, I have been testing it out, but with inconclusive results.
My SLI ex never seemed to be horny. The LSI ex really liked sex, but I'm not sure if it was because she was having fun or because she had 100% of my attention and she was pretty much in control of the situation, even though it seemed like I was the dominant one.
Pure horniness, I'm not sure I've seen. But I could be completely wrong, since I'm not a mind-reader.
Last edited by Adam Strange; 08-01-2020 at 08:29 PM.
how the fuck.....has anyone not seen pure horniness? And even if you've not had friends who happen to be female and picked up on it/talked about it...how can this be in doubt?
yes.
no.
Last edited by Hope; 07-31-2020 at 07:53 PM.
People are same. At least those who have normal sexual interests. It's too instinctual and has more chance to be supressed, than changed.
Any action is an aggression. To be stubborn is important to achieve something not easy. Se types are the most stubborn and most direct, also most jealous to protect what they want or have.It's among main traits of their "aggressor tactics". Also they may more often gift expensive things.
Ni types initially play in push games even when they like you, as think "if he likes me seriously - he'll be trying seriously, if he'll get me easily - I'll be lesser interesting for him, his feelings will be lesser and he will lesser value me and our relations later to invest in this". Ni types value money and expensive gifts, are charmed by this - they significantly measure by material investments in them the own value for that human and even in general. Se types have the most to deal with their games and needs.
> It’s usually only unattractive, socially inept men who resort to chasing/“aggressor tactics”
There is a difference between propaganda and real world. That propaganda exaggerates and tries to reduce natural sexual behavior by negative images of that to destroy cores of peoples personality and to make softer slaves. The other example of that is "gender" philosophy and homosexuality "norma" nonsense.
Se/Ni types seems are closest to cultural ideals of man-warrior (Se) and woman-princess (Ni) for who they fight. Se types fight in most direct way.
2nd part
Last edited by Sol; 08-03-2020 at 11:28 AM.
People are same. At least those who have normal sexual interests. It's too instinctual and has more chance to be supressed, than changed.
Any action is an aggression. To be stubborn is important to achieve something not easy. Se types are the most stubborn and most direct, also most jealous to protect what they want or have.
Ni types initially play in push games even when they like you, as think "if he likes me seriously - he'll be trying seriously, if he'll get me easily - I'll be lesser interesting for him, his feelings will be lesser and he will lesser value me and our relations later to invest in this". Ni types value money and expensive gifts, are charmed by this - they significantly measure by material investments in them the own value for that human and even in general. Se types have the most to deal with their games and needs.
> It’s usually only unattractive, socially inept men who resort to chasing/“aggressor tactics”
There is a difference between propaganda and real world. That propaganda exaggerates and tries to reduce natural sexual behavior by negative images of that to destroy cores of peoples personality and to make softer slaves. The other example of that is "gender" philosophy and homosexuality "norma" nonsense.
Se/Ni types seems are closest to cultural ideals of man-warrior (Se) and woman-princess (Ni) for who they fight. Se types fight in most direct way.
nope. i don't like expensive gifts.
Dat is quite weird thinking since the whole erotic attitudes is based on type (excluding mirror pairs) specific differences.
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
If we talk about Se in this context it will be the Se mobilising types that are head over heels for this. Usually suggestive function works like taking a distance when confronted but it also gets comfortable around it when there is longer exposure.
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
Can you give some examples of “aggressor tactics”, and tell us when they worked better?
You usually don’t get anywhere by staying put. If you want anything in life, you have to try to get it somehow. I don’t think waiting for someone else to make the first move is a stellar way to get a girl.
Usually the person with the least sexual market value chases the one with the higher sexual market value
I don't know about the "sexual market value", but I am most attracted to a woman when she has some trait that I really admire. Some trait that makes her better than me in some area. That doesn't have to be sexual market value. I think, for me, it's beauty and intelligence, and both of those things are very individualistic.
I remember this one guy commented disparagingly on my first GF's looks when he didn't know we were going together. My reaction was, "How would you like a fist in the face?"*
For example, I can tell when a woman is objectively beautiful, and when I think she is beautiful and desirable, and the two don't overlap much. My ex-wife could look both stunningly, classily beautiful, and she could look mannish and slightly weird. And that's OK. And to those two characteristics (beauty and intelligence) I'm looking for, I've now added "a slightly low key sexuality". A look that says, "Hey, buddy. That door is open to you." But isn't stated explicitly. Rather, it's just thought.
*
"My hair is pale blond and wavy and I'm pretty. Not beautiful - Praxiteles would not have given me a second look - but real beauty is likely to scare a man off, or else make him quite unmanageable, whereas prettiness, properly handled, is an asset."
- Podkayne of Mars, Robert Heinlein.
SMV depends on taste to an extent but there are universal qualities that most people value like intelligence, accomplishments, interesting lifestyle, compatible personality and looks
Why are you violent? What exactly do you feel punching people in the face is gonna accomplish?
EII-INFj / INFP / Strong E4 and 9 energy / Melancholic-Phlegmatic / Musical-Intrapersonal-Spatial / Kinky-Sensual
@andreasdevig, I was raised in a violent household where differences of opinion were settled by force. Wanting to punch that guy was a gut-level reaction. I don’t do that anymore. I discovered that violence only teaches other people to be violent. It is the low-intelligence and inappropriate approach to problem solving.
I don't believe it's always how you were raised. My parents were the opposite of this and my gut reaction still has always been to punch assholes in the face.
Nothing. He's the typical Se mobilising guy trying to let people know how TOUGH he is to hide some sort of insecurity.
Si polrs are the saddest fellas.
I disagree. I think assertive people or intense people or even just INTERESTED IN ROMANCE ppl (even the quiet ones) often act in ways to draw or approach people. I know many, many cases where the more conventionally attractive, educated, more privileged class person either intentionally acts to draw 1st or approaches 1st the person who is/has less of those traits. They have more resources to do so...
yeah u can disagree but this is facts. and what u say doesnt contradict what i said
I can disagree....and, you've given no more evidence than I have
Wouldn't always say that. I've spent a good amount of time chasing after a couple guys that I thought were less objectively attractive than myself.
Read fhe first word of my fuckin comment
I'm unusual
I think these romantic styles manifest differently in different cultures.
We live in a culture where men initiating romance with women is less of a one way street (women can do the initiating too), and that's a good thing I think.
That said, I don't think a man initiating with a woman is looked down on either. What is looked down on, more often, is chasing after the person has told you they aeren't interested, but that is something both men and women are discouraged to do in my experience.
The "aggressor" romance style is less about taking initiative and more about a competitive and sometimes even disdainful attitude towards one's partner. Often getting someone to take the initiative on you (compelling them to do so) is just as much an "aggressor" tactic as initiating.
Just my 2c.
Men aren't as a group supposed to do anything. We are each individual people. If you mean societies pressure groups to behave a certain way, well, yes, that can happen, but it's not a great trend to get in line with: you'll not draw people who genuinely fit you as well, and youll get people who don't fit you wondering if they do, and that is wasting your time. Women and men are all finding romance a personal challenge.
Gulenko did a craptastic job describing the romance styles. I'm not sure whether you're talking about those. If you are, disregard the creepy comparisons and just read for the dynamics and actual traits.
ALSO:
Confidence is the most attractive trait a woman can have according to a large study on men, and the same result was found about a trait men coud have when women were studied.
So called dominant subtype characteristics. I actually view it turnoffish.
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
no. not dominance. confidence. they are discreet. I've met many a confident SEI, EII, IEI, ESI, etc
He's referring to DCNH subtype theory. There are introverted feelers with dominant subtypes, too.
But I agree with you that confidence and dominance are not the same thing.
thank you 4 explainijng
This tbh, it seems to seem that this is universally liked because most people (it seems that women are especially affected by this) tend to be normalizing sub-types.
There is no need to be a asshole or act like like a 'tough guy' it is not even needed to be competent.
Women are attracted to you for different reasons, some of them are Victimish or Childlike behavior depending on the ego functions.
Caregiver Women like to give care and will be endeared by Ne goofiness and helplesness in Practical matters while Se women like playful submission and weakness as long as you are able to keep up with her games.
ImE the most important things are Chemistry (depends a lot on Instincts) Looks and Ego Functions (and their Subtype accentuation). So typical Fatherly or Badass behavior is mostly mandatory to be attractive to Ne and Ni egos.
Creative Subtypes are best attracted by harmonizing behavior, and yes to pull a normalizer you should be the typical 'dominant' Douchebag that pop cutlure wants to turn everybody into by false common sense but otherwise it is not needed, not at all.
Be a good person, have matching instincts and ego functions, most of it really is compatibility and then, while being compatible being authentic.
Yes being successful helps but in my experience when there is a strong instinctual and Perceiving function attraction mostly in a sense of social desirability of you as a mate, not for the sake of raw attraction.
I agree. As a childlike NF type, I like women who take care of me. Mostly SLI women I've seen are very daddy.
Everyone can morph into having dominant role but with confidence you can actually be both - true confidence because the hierarchy of the subtypes kind of sets the limit in comparative sense.
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
I've been wondering this myself. I remember when I first joined this forum we could talk about how aggressor/victim Rocky and Adrien are, but now it's rape culture, and I honestly feel torn about all of this. The contradictions were present with Adrien and Rocky, the it's great he knows this is what she needs to continue, but then for every one of her there are probably ten women who can't get Rocky to stop and it kills them inside. Sigh.
It reminds me of my first date. He took me out to the middle of nowhere, but I knew where we were going before we went because there were only so many places. He seemed caught off guard afterwards to my apparent lack of regard for danger and lack of questioning, but he didn't know I was running this show. I knew where, I knew what, the only thing I didn't know is that he would be so surprised by my not verbalizing what I knew. This became a rapidly growing problem, this need of his to assume I know nothing, when I know everything (I mean if we have to talk in absolutes). I wouldn't have even gone out with him if I sensed danger. I sensed none at all. I sensed someone I could predict at every move. Naturally I didn't tell him any of this either, because why should I have to? I did forget that he had a mind too I guess though, so that's on me. As always, every evaluation of another is just an evaluation of myself projected on others.
Also, I do play dumb around ppl in this awful E9 way. It's like they call all the shots, but I only engage socially when I know what shots they will call to my satisfaction. In work places though, I become the throw rug, the carpet walked all over, because the power differential is beyond me. They have power, I don't, and it's all I can think of. I feel like a slave and victim. I can't fight them because they hold the means of my survival. It's like my relationship with my father over and over and I can't get out of it. But it's true that they have power, it's true they keep the gates of who is allowed a living wage and who must suffer not having the resources they need to survive. It's true this is wrong. But still that's not how so many people see work places. They don't see them as torture chambers as I do. They don't see bondage and servitude.
This is also why whenever I have any power over another at work I want to drop it like a hot ember. I see their primal human will trying to assert and express itself and I say I will not be the one to kill it. So i remove consequence. They can do no wrong because they have the least power. It's a perverse way I wonder of seeing power, and it doesn't help to not set boundaries, but the only boundaries set for me in childhood were abusive, so I distrust everything. In this way I don't know the harm I do. I only suspect I do harm by being too weak and permissive. But I never see examples of a good way that satisfy me. In workplaces, I've noticed most supervisors don't really know what they're doing, and most of them are bad leaders.
Last edited by marooned; 08-02-2020 at 03:20 AM.
I was on this forum waaay back, and I pointed out nearly a decade ago about that scene that I AM an Ni type and that what Rocky did was not sexy. It made sense that it might be easy for a boxer and uneducated and lonely person to illegally hold someone captive (AND NO THIS IS NOT SOME NEWLY RECOGNIZED AS BAD THING; THIS HAS ACTUALLY BEEN ON THE LAW BOOKS AS A CRIME REGARDLESS OF ANY HORNINESS OR NOT, AND IT'S WEIRD SOME GUYS DON'T GET THAT WOMEN AREN'T SUPPOSED TO HAVE LESS PROTECTION BY ILLEGAL CAPTIVITY LAWS JUST BECAUSE THE CRIMINAL IS AROUSED; you can still like a person who commits a crime and is in the wrong. It's okay to care about Rocky.) Ni types don't like being forced. That's a stupid comparison Gulenko went off on a tangent about. Ni types like someone being physically demonstrative. It's not the same thing. And Si types aren't pedophiles etc etc
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote