ESFp

[DEAD]

I was just reflecting upon that. I said my mom is LSE and has batshit spiritual stuff going on, well, it was much worst before, now she found better... better... better sources. If I do cherrypick the worst she has said and done, it's clear I'll get the "not an LSE" speech. :/
From peeps who have never met her, who hasn't grown up around her. It's why I'm sure of her type; through years, it became obvious without me seeking an answer. I just read around for the fun of it and certain things started making sense, some "why" became clear.
On this, I'm gonna take your advice. It's sunny out and I could use some air.

Yeah of course. My Dad is some sort of ILI/LIE "logical" type and he's into spiritual things. He's borderline obsessed with them, but I still know that he processes information like a Gamma NT would usually. I think that later in life, a lot of "logical" types (no, not all) go into some sort of spiritual seeking mode (nothing wrong with that) to find answers that they cared less about when they were younger. It's like a fulfilment for a lot of them. And yes, please do. Or just do something else.

[flowers and sugar]

Yeah of course. My Dad is some sort of ILI/LIE "logical" type and he's into spiritual things. He's borderline obsessed with them, but I still know that he processes information like a Gamma NT would usually. I think that later in life, a lot of "logical" types (no, not all) go into some sort of spiritual seeking mode (nothing wrong with that) to find answers that they cared less about when they were younger. It's like a fulfilment for a lot of them. And yes, please do. Or just do something else.

A lot of people feel the need for spiritual stuff later in life, and a lot don't. For my mom it started at an early age, she had dreams as a kid and a near death experience at 24. I grew up in tarot cards, new age stuff, chakras, quotes from Buddha and Jesus...
I find fascinating to learn what led one person to see the world the way they do, arg, I got stuff to do.
I had a pretty damn nice walk, your post arrived just at the right time to keep me from mopping, lol.

[DEAD]

A lot of people feel the need for spiritual stuff later in life, and a lot don't. For my mom it started at an early age, she had dreams as a kid and a near death experience at 24. I grew up in tarot cards, new age stuff, chakras, quotes from Buddha and Jesus...
I find fascinating to learn what led one person to see the world the way they do, arg, I got stuff to do.
I had a pretty damn nice walk, your post arrived just at the right time to keep me from mopping, lol.

Of course, yes. I am glad lol.

[one]

Saving the universe as it is in its current form may never happen. Mental illnesses will always be around. Basically what I’m saying is, don’t make Socionics your whole life. Don’t get too absorbed into the system that it affects your whole life, and it starts interfering with it and your mental health. Go and have some fun. Enjoy things. You know? You mightn’t have a lot of places to go because of lockdown but you can still have fun before everything becomes worse.

You are more than just a cliche in a Russian system with a specific set of behaviours.

Speaking of cliches, the whole “I can tell your personality through VI” is such a meme that I can’t even cope anymore. Or reading stereotypical, shallow archetype based descriptions and gleaning from that. Knowing someone’s “personality” type in a system takes a gradual process. And even still, you have to get to know the whole system and character of the person and how they use their IMEs.

Looking to constant outwardly behaviour and cliches doesn’t get you anywhere. It’s about what goes on inside. People like to complicate this by offering bs theories and ideas that just waste time. How you process the world in this system is more important than “does X act like a troll? Is X serious?” etc.

We are people, this is just a system.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's a way of describing people, knowing the other person's inclinations or maybe even personality could be one of its goals too. Descriptions can be shallow because it's focusing on general traits, it's stupid to expect that Socionics will give you every detail about your life. But a lot of people just like in other systems are self-absorbed, so either they use the system to reinforce the traits they have and flaunt them like a badge (and defend their types from people they don't want) and/or criticize the system and say it's nothing and they couldn't see themselves within a certain type (thinking they are that unique).

Looking outward behavior is a way for others to realize truths. It's not lesser than looking within because the goal is different. The goal is to systematize, not to realize personal preferences. Specially if you are an NT type. Regarding theories and ideas - these people disagree with one another but there is a goal to these things. Time can be perceived as wasted by people who are not inclined to do such activity, while for others it's their way of perceiving the world.

[DEAD]

It's a way of describing people, knowing the other person's inclinations or maybe even personality could be one of its goals too. Descriptions can be shallow because it's focusing on general traits, it's stupid to expect that Socionics will give you every detail about your life. But a lot of people just like in other systems are self-absorbed, so either they use the system to reinforce the traits they have and flaunt them like a badge (and defend their types from people they don't want) and/or criticize the system and say it's nothing and they couldn't see themselves within a certain type (thinking they are that unique).

Looking outward behavior is a way for others to realize truths. It's not lesser than looking within because the goal is different. The goal is to systematize, not to realize personal preferences. Specially if you are an NT type. Regarding theories and ideas - these people disagree with one another but there is a goal to these things. Time can be perceived as wasted by people who are not inclined to do such activity, while for others it's their way of perceiving the world.

Yeah, but I find that a lot of what the Russian system (OG) says in terms of descriptions (of personality) doesn't translate as well into (Western) societies where a lot of the students of Socionics also come from (like Western Europe and the USA) because the system is so heavily influenced by the Russians who made it what it is today, and I also think a lot of it can be (mistranslated) and confuse people who aren't familiar with the Russian language. But yeah, some people take it at face value and don't really look into these things, or take those factors onboard. They expect Socionics to describe them as say ILIs or LSIs perfectly. But the issue with that is that people also have their own personalities, and some people have mental differences which can also impact how they "act" compared to traditional views of people from X type. And people who put too much emphasis on behaviours and descriptions alone overlook this and say that Person Y is X type without actually analysing their IMEs and taking into account HOW if affects how they act and how they process things as well.

Yeah, I think it's stupid flaunting things and basing your identity around being a certain bunch of traits, when it's more than that. Snowflakes who think they are unique are dumb. No-one is actually 100% original. Nothing is. It's also about the IMEs and being realistic about them more than just your self perception of X type and you being X type. Again, stereotyping on their behalf.

Like I said, outward behaviour doesn't always tell the whole story in every case, especially if that person has a mental disorder, but still processes information in a similar way of X type. It's not always the truth, or the full story. It can be a combination of both inward and outward parts synthesizing to create a more accurate picture of the overall type. Everyone has their own methods of problem solving within the system. I don't get the whole "NT, SF whatever are more likely to do X" shtick but I get where it comes from, you know? "Average" analysis of X types. I guess a lot of people just look into it too much or something. But yeah, it depends on the person, not the stereotype alone.

[Eliza Thomason]

I was just reflecting upon that. I said my mom is LSE and has batshit spiritual stuff going on, well, it was much worst before, now she found better... better... better sources. If I do cherrypick the worst she has said and done, it's clear I'll get the "not an LSE" speech. :/
From peeps who have never met her, who hasn't grown up around her. It's why I'm sure of her type; through years, it became obvious without me seeking an answer. I just read around for the fun of it and certain things started making sense, some "why" became clear.
On this, I'm gonna take your advice. It's sunny out and I could use some air.

I hope you don't think I was questioning your typing of your mom when I mentioned (somewhere here; I forgot where) that I did not know any mentally unstable LSEs. I wasn't. I know EVERY type can be mentally unstable. For example I was married to an unstable ESE. But I also know ESEs that are not only stable but truly admirable people. I was simply curious like a scientist on how instability might manifest in a LSE!

So I just wanted to be sure you did not think I was questioning your typing of her. I have no reason to eo that.

[flowers and sugar]

I hope you don't think I was questioning your typing of your mom when I mentioned (somewhere here; I forgot where) that I did not know any mentally unstable LSEs. I wasn't. I know EVERY type can be mentally unstable. For example I was married to an unstable ESE. But I also know ESEs that are not only stable but truly admirable people. I was simply curious like a scientist on how instability might manifest in a LSE!

So I just wanted to be sure you did not think I was questioning your typing of her. I have no reason to eo that.

This is a public forum, anyone could chime in and I'm too tired for this. I think maybe you'd think the stuff she believed in in the past is against God, but she thinks so too now, so lol.
And tbh, I wasn't sure about sharing so much personal stuff about her, it could make her sound like a bad person. I once talked about someone leaving the father of her kids because violence and got an earfull about her being a bad mom on here. It was really weird and abrasive, so I'm suspicious to a fault by now.

It's the usual story of a person who is seeking something to fill a void they feel inside and falling into not so great things, passing beside what could be good for them, self-sabotaging, not valuing what they already have. And I also don't want to sound like a victim, which could happen and I'm sick of it happening.
My statement was general and filled with past hurt, sorry if you felt it was directed at you, it was not my intention.

[Eliza Thomason]

This is a public forum, anyone could chime in and I'm too tired for this. I think maybe you'd think the stuff she believed in in the past is against God, but she thinks so too now, so lol.
And tbh, I wasn't sure about sharing so much personal stuff about her, it could make her sound like a bad person. I once talked about someone leaving the father of her kids because violence and got an earfull about her being a bad mom on here. It was really weird and abrasive, so I'm suspicious to a fault by now.

It's the usual story of a person who is seeking something to fill a void they feel inside and falling into not so great things, passing beside what could be good for them, self-sabotaging, not valuing what they already have. And I also don't want to sound like a victim, which could happen and I'm sick of it happening.
My statement was general and filled with past hurt, sorry if you felt it was directed at you, it was not my intention.

I am really sorry it seemed like I was questioning your typing of your own Mom. I wouldn't do that because I always assume people know how to type the people they know! The only exception would be in the case it becomes quite clear the typing could be off, in which case I would ask, "Did you ever consider __ for them, because..." But I don't think that has happened; I think it's been only the very occasional self-typing I've ever questioned, when I become quite sure, but then, I also learned that some people don't care if they self-type wrong; they get attached to their type choice and they don't want to reconsider, so I don't push it, particularly if they are sensitive, or also if I see they are the wrong half of an uneven relationship type to me.

I am very interested in family-type dynamics, that is why I asked.

When I first learned 16 types it was MBTI, and I studied books on it, especially Isabel Brigg's Gifts Differing, and I typed everyone I knw or met (IEEs take a holistic panoramic approach and with intuition we can type pretty quickly, sometimes). I was very motivated to understand my own family and friends. Then, finding Socionics I really got into it with the new tools of Relationship Types and Renins.

Recently I connected with an old friend from growing up I knew from summer vacations. There were two sisters, one just older, and one just younger, but the older LSE was my good friend. No questions she was a LSE. I have a LSE brother, and in high school a LSE best friend. Both she and my friend were real leader types. My Activity partners. But what was her younger sister. I felt a blank at first about what she was, but figured it out by looking at the 16 relationships and eliminating all the relationship types they for sure weren't - not Identical, not Conflictors, not Supervisor nor Benefactor, and so on, narrowing it down to just a few considerations. Also I knew younger sis was an "I" for sure - as "I's" inner world is bigger than the outer one, which is a reason I was at first stumped at guessing her type. I asked myself, what was the "big part" inside of her? T or F? Clearly T; she had encyclopedic knowledge even as a child, and T things animated her. Also the LII VI worked for her. Thus I arrived at LII for her after our adult lives were quite apart, confirmed by the fact that that made she and her sister were an Illusionary Relationship - that fit, as although both are very accomplished, their accomplishments as children tended to be separate rather than as a team. and their relationship was peaceful.

That is an example o my thought process when I type. Another thing I do is sometimes I get a "feel" of the person, which is quite real even if it is here online, even with no VI, and compare that to the "feel" of people I know in real life and that happens usually not voluntarily. That is much how I feel quite sure @DEAD is SEE. (Dead, I hope you will forgive a tiny bit of off-topic here in your SEE thread).

I also think it is kind and conscientious of you to be careful not to dishonor your mother with your words. I also had that issue with my ex-husband, who I thought would always be my husband. Issues that I found only much later to be a psychological disorder caused problems that I suffered to live with, and I needed help to understand, and could not afford the many, many therapist appointments it would take to get to the bottom of it, so I turned to trusted friends (particularly those who respected marriage and were skilled communicators as I thought communication could fix the problems). I had some guilt about that, but, since my goal was to be a better wife in order to fix the problems, and I had no where else to turn, it seemed right. I still think it was right, because a person suffering trapped in a painful relationship needs a friend and someone to hear their reality.

I am really surprised someone here would make that bad mom comment. A "J" type? They can make hasty judgments. And consider if that poster herself had past injuries involving a difficult mom, her motive may have actually been empathy. But I am only guessing, as I did not see those posts.

Also I want to say, perhaps in this, or in another case, you were a victim in your life. If so, recognizing it and understanding it is the way through to ensuring it won't happen again. When I stumbled upon the book Verbally Abusive Relationships, when previously married, I read it for another reason. To get garner some verbal "responses" to communicate for times when my husband would be mean, was all. I was shocked to see the opening pages defining what such an abusive relationship was, and that I could checkoff pretty much ALL the boxes. I did NOT consider myself a victim. I did not like the word. Yet the facts were right there in front of me, and very clear. I had been victimized and I was in deep. It was an obviously very wrong thing, and now I needed to learn to not be a victim (and handy - the book told you how!) (I also consulted with the author because I was deep into abuse and wanted to fix this error of abuse/victim as soon as possible, while still, I hoped and believed I could, staying in my marriage.

But my husband later left, because the reward of the hurt looks on my face was his coveted Narcissist Supply, and I had deprived him of it, so what was in it for him, now? He was skilled at being charming, and he once confided to me, "I can make anybody think anything I want them to think," so, he had the skills to secure a new someone else who would be convinced of his grandiosity. And after a short period of fishing around, he did. (I later stumbled on his emails left open - something I had no thought of my own to search for - and so I then "witnessed" the whole selection/seduction process; and I believe my Guardian Angel showed them to me to prevent me from positive-thinking this reality away, and trying to "save my marriage" which my ex took advantage of that naivety to secretly work make his his exit with the most damage to me and least to himself. Seeing those emails prevented that and saved me!)

So, that is my past drama, long over now. My point is, IF you have been victimized in any way, the step to not having it happen again is first understanding HOW you were a victim. Pretending everything is normal when it is not because it is nicer not to think those things doesn't help. (I only say that becasue I did that for years).

Just sharing. I realize that might not be anything at all like anything you have gone through.

Curious: I wonder what a LSE Mom would be like, because they are VERY take charge people. It could be a real issue if your mom was your LSE supervisor, especially for a feeling type, because it could get oppressing, since they don't have a lot of empathetic understanding of other viewpoints, so much, but most especially (like all of us) of their Supervisee! What is your relationship type with your Mom?

[DEAD]

That is an example of my thought process when I type. Another thing I do is sometimes I get a "feel" of the person, which is quite real even if it is here online, even with no VI, and compare that to the "feel" of people I know in real life and that happens usually not voluntarily. That is much how I feel quite sure @DEAD is SEE. (Dead, I hope you will forgive a tiny bit of off-topic here in your SEE thread).

Yeah, I'm definitely not reading the rest of that post. The only part I care about is the one you tagged me in, lol. I think that having an intuitive feel of a person is useless, but that's just my opinion. Especially online, but that's just me. VI is also bs because you can't tell how a person acts just by looking at them. Peoples appearance and expressions change. You'd need a whole comprehensive set of images to observe over a period of time to in order to accurately VI someone. One picture can't give you even accurate vibes, or whatever you call that.

[Bethany]

I have a question for the thread, if it's allowed In what way are SEEs similar to IEIs? You see, I often think of IEE and SEI being similar..if I'm trying to understand one, it can help if I think about the other.

Curious to know if people see SEE and IEI as being similar. I like my SEI and IEE friends a lot, but I admit, I often think of them as having similar 'bad' qualities? For some reason, it helps me accept these things, seeing them in both types.

[DEAD]

I have a question for the thread, if it's allowed In what way are SEEs similar to IEIs? You see, I often think of IEE and SEI being similar..if I'm trying to understand one, it can help if I think about the other.

Curious to know if people see SEE and IEI as being similar. I like my SEI and IEE friends a lot, but I admit, I often think of them as having similar 'bad' qualities? For some reason, it helps me accept these things, seeing them in both types.

The only thing I can think of is that they’re both on the Ni/Se spectrum and have strong Fe/Fi (ethics). Other than that, I don’t think much. IEI are hit and miss for me. Same with EIE. There are only a few of them I like and those are people that I share something with i.e. experimental music and musicians. Other than that, I don’t care for them or get on with them much. I tend to ignore them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bethany]

The only thing I can think of is that they’re both on the Ni/Se spectrum and have strong Fe/Fi (ethics). Other than that, I don’t think much. IEI are hit and miss for me. Same with EIE. There are only a few of them I like and those are people that I share something with i.e. experimental music and musicians. Other than that, I don’t care for them or get on with them much. I tend to ignore them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hm yeah I only have one SEE friend from uni, and then my sister is SEE (e7). I get on well with my sister, and I suppose maybe because she's my sister it's easier to look past things that might be annoying otherwise with other SEEs. I also think I might get on better with SEE e8s but haven't come across many.

With IEE and SEI- I think they can both find it hard to recognise when they are at fault in a situation of conflict, or that they might have played a part in the conflict manifesting. Whereas SEE and IEI seem to understand that a disagreement between people is something that can be analysed and explained, by thinking about the attitudes and feelings of both people involved. Maybe this is a se/ni + ethics thing, I don't know. However, an IEE or SEI might have something to say about SEEs and IEIs approach to dealing with conflict.

I think my sister and I both do like to get things off our chests, and we will voice some strong opinions, (me more than her?) before we come to the conclusion that the other person didn't mean to upset us..It might take us both a while but we seem to get there in the end. Also, I think my SEE sister will try to wind people up who she is annoyed with, where as I will just call them all the names under the sun behind their back haha. (if they are that bad )

[flowers and sugar]

@Eliza Thomason
I have read books on verbal violence, emotional manipulation in the past. I wouldn't wish that on anyone.
I got lucky because even tho my mother used to fit the profil, she mostly didn't know how else to behave.
When I started using the responses from the books on her, her behavior completely changed. In a way, I hate saying this because it can sound like I think I made her a better person, but I feel more like "the stars aligned" or that she had a will to become otherwise and my action helped her figure it out. I'm not her savior, I was there to witness and had my own stuff to learn.
I don't see myself as a victim in this story. I guess it helped me that I supervise her. There can be this feeling that your supervisee is kinda dumb, like they don't get it, you know. That did help because I was more bewildered by her insults than hurt. For exemple, she did call me fat often, but I know the fact that I have a healthy weight. Her ideal is underweight. It's a question of personal comfort for her, the lighter she is the better she feels. It makes no sense to me.
Her intentions were good, to share what makes her comfortable... even tho I don't get the point most of the time. Socionics helped me see that she isn't a weird moron like I started to think around 6y-o.

I don't think my mom would be a good exemple of LSE mom, just a bad one. I suspect she had to cope with many things that I can only guess about and that her mental health wasn't very good. She fits the worst case of Te written by Jung, how because they feel powerless to make things right, they end up lashing out on their closest ones. All the while maintaining a good outer image.
I feel bad talking about certain things because I lack facts to truly understand it, but is it wise to go ask her how she got in a sect that was into collective suicide? Even worse since I'm not supposed to know about it, I heard adults talking when I was 12. Were they even right?
Spirituality takes priority in her life, it has been this way for as long as I remember, and I was never fully included. I heard the fights she had with my father, the stuff she spoke about with her friend, saw her leave to meet a man she chatted spiritualy with online. She came back because he was an asshole.
She also picked my father because he was into spirituality, tho she ended up thinking he was a fool.
I remember it was outlandish. I remember they thought it made them better than others, superior beings of light favored by life. That's what made it really batshit, new age stuff plus big ego thinking it was factual shoving it around like they were God in person, but the words have faded from my memory.
I thinks it's better this way, time to move on.

And thanks for the MBTI book link.

[DEAD]

Hm yeah I only have one SEE friend from uni, and then my sister is SEE (e7). I get on well with my sister, and I suppose maybe because she's my sister it's easier to look past things that might be annoying otherwise with other SEEs. I also think I might get on better with SEE e8s but haven't come across many.

With IEE and SEI- I think they can both find it hard to recognise when they are at fault in a situation of conflict, or that they might have played a part in the conflict manifesting. Whereas SEE and IEI seem to understand that a disagreement between people is something that can be analysed and explained, by thinking about the attitudes and feelings of both people involved. Maybe this is a se/ni + ethics thing, I don't know. However, an IEE or SEI might have something to say about SEEs and IEIs approach to dealing with conflict.

I think my sister and I both do like to get things off our chests, and we will voice some strong opinions, (me more than her?) before we come to the conclusion that the other person didn't mean to upset us..It might take us both a while but we seem to get there in the end. Also, I think my SEE sister will try to wind people up who she is annoyed with, where as I will just call them all the names under the sun behind their back haha. (if they are that bad )

Yeah, I'm not really into enneagram as I have no clue of my type but I think that if you are an Ni subtype and the E8 is Se subtype, it might have something to do with it. If you're into duality. Still not sure about duality, as sometimes it doesn't really translate into reality from my experience. It might work better for other people. And it probably depends on their own personality as well. Some SEE seem to veer more towards the fiery and opinionated end of the spectrum, and others are more friendly and laid back. And life maturity and experience also affects that. When I was younger, I used to be pretty cold and aggressive but now less so.

Yeah, maybe it is. Maybe IEE and SEI are less into conflicts and resolution. They seem to usually be more chill (not all of them) than Gammas or Betas. Yeah, of course. My brother and I sometimes argue. (He's probably a dumb SLI/LSI) about a lot of things. I think he thinks that he can supervise me, when he really can't. I just yell and people when I get fed up and tell them to their faces.

[Bethany]

I think IEI's often understand more than they can articulate.

Hmm yes..maybe sometimes. Also, I think my brain kinda turned to mush when I developed mental health problems at age 17. I don't think I was ever a natural with language, however I was quite clever in high school. Discovering typlogogy and this forum makes me feel like I'm in school again and I can be clever again if I put the effort in! (i.e learn more about the functions at least so I can take part in more discussion..the thing is I'm not quite comfortable with the functions as I think they overlap too much..it's probably good to go back and learn the basics though hm..)

[Bethany]

Yeah, I'm not really into enneagram as I have no clue of my type but I think that if you are an Ni subtype and the E8 is Se subtype, it might have something to do with it. If you're into duality. Still not sure about duality, as sometimes it doesn't really translate into reality from my experience. It might work better for other people. And it probably depends on their own personality as well.

-Hmm from what I've seen..duality does seem to work. I can think of about 10 'happy', settled down couples I know, and half them are dual couples. The rest are mirrors, activity or lookalike and they seem happy too. All seem to have good chemistry and affection between them.

I think enneagram might play a part in compatability. At the moment, I am exploring tritype and instincts. I am trying to type people according to their core enneagram type and instinct (e.g I am a social 9) and also figure out their tritype. You seem smart in an E7 way...I'm not gonna say more than that as I haven't thought much about it and can't offer an explanation at this point. I think enneagram and socionics are just different systems for measuring and mapping out people's personalities. There is some overlap somehow but it's not clear to me how. For me, it seems best to separate them.

But maybe you can kinda see it as they represent two parts of the personality- one on top of the other. But they’re not the same shape or size :s

When I was younger I was approached by a fair few E7 males and when I first started thinking about compatibility these are the ones I saw myself with..7 and 9 seemed romantic to me. 8s seem more soulful, and 7s more romantic lol. 8/3 is starting to seem better for me now. I know two dual couples..one seems to be 8 with a 9 and the other seems to be 7 with a 6. At least I'm being more open-minded anyway lol.

-My SEE sister always says she knows 'straight away' if she likes someone or not. I know that can be true of everyone and people do learn what they 'like' or what's good for them through experience, but I do think she also can read people in a way that is different to how I do. I think she has a 'strong' gut feeling about whether someone is worth spending her time on. But then my SEE aunt seems a bit all over the place when it comes to relationships. Not sure what point I'm trying to make..

[Okay]

I like SEEs because I take life too seriously sometimes and they seem like they don't give a shit and this is refreshing for me.

[DEAD]

I like SEEs because I take life too seriously sometimes and they seem like they don't give a shit and this is refreshing for me.

I stopped giving a shit before it was cool.

[Alomoes]

Yeah, I can see Muhammad Ali as SEE or ESI, but I don't know anything about him personally.

The ambition is incredibly high, but it's tempered by their Fi. They become a great big protector. Someone like Mussolini. Once you cross them, they will break you, or at least try. If it's not physical, they will lose, however, they are pretty clever. Their inventiveness leads to some innovative plans to get back at people.

JFK could be SEE, but is likely ILI. He did a lot of stuff I believe would be more reasonable for ILI to do. For example, the peace corps. I don't think SEE has the foresight to create something that lasts so long. I think SEE would be a better general for Kennedy's marine corps. Someone to lead the invasion of Cuba. A counter to Che Guevara, perhaps his own Che Guevara.

Che sounds about right for the person that would be SEE, and I think you'd understand why he never was Castro.