Benefit Relations between Victim and Aggressor types

[Joy]

Generally the Victim/Aggressor game is quite stimulating to both partners. In the case of this particular relation, such is not the case. The beneficiary does not possess the capability to allure and entice the benefactor, especially compared to the benefactor's dual or activity partner. The games and tests involved in Ni/Se interactions don't have as much of an appeal to one's benefactor because that's just the nature of those relations. Benefactors may find the games and tests annoying, may find them boring, etc. I think relations of benefit can be particularly frustrating for Ni type beneficiaries because their benefactors aren't all that responsive to their ploys. It can feel like a rejection.

[Blaze]

Games and tests? Example?

[Slacker]

This isn't a romantic relationship, but the caregiver/infantile thing isn't as good as a relation of benefit as in a dual situation either. I wrote about hanging out with my mother-in-law (ESFj) and my semi-dual father-in-law for that matter too (ISFp) and they give me care, but it feels like they've made a big effort and I feel some sense of guilt that I'm getting the attention and some need to reciprocate. I don't feel that way when my dual or activity partner do caretaking type things. Again, I'm not talking about romantic relationships, just in general.

Maybe the victim/aggressor thing doesn't show up in non-romantic relationships? Because caretaker types seem to be able to sense I'm receptive to caretaking and want to take care of me no matter what kind of relationship we have. Actually that's on my list of reasons why Socionics seems to have some truth to it - long before I heard of Socionics I wondered why some people seem to feel a compulsion to care for my physical comfort. It's odd to be an adult and notice people doting on you almost like a child, and not doting on every other adult. I don't notice the caretaking behavior as much with Si+Te people - it feels like they're taking care of their own comfort and I just benefit because I'm in the vicinity. But with Si+Fe people it's very clear that things are being done for me specifically. But "victim/aggressor" seems like it would be a more specifically sexual thing maybe? What are your feelings on that? Does it show up in non-romantic relationships?

I'm sorry that this is a bit of a tangent - I don't mean to steer things off course. I'm just curious about these "erotic attitudes" and whether anyone else has noticed them outside of an erotic or even romantic relationship.

My fairly long-term relationship with an ENTj consisted of him continually baiting me (I'm guessing it would be what you call "games and tests"), I presume now in an attempt to get me to become aggressive? Anyway, it just got ugly. I'm sure he was unhappy with that too. I wish him well. Last I heard he was dating someone I know who is an ESFp. That's probably a better match than I was.

[FDG]

Maybe the victim/aggressor thing doesn't show up in non-romantic relationships?

Yeah, not as likely. IME, frienships mostly develop into clubs (st sf nt nf).

I don't know if I know an ENTj IRL. I might know one guy that could be. Our relations seem to be composed of him trying to make fun of me? And me putting him down sometimes. We are actually good friends but I don't like when he does that. He could be an ISTj too though.

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[Joy]

Specific examples won't do much good because a lot of times the people around the Ni/Se pair don't understand what's going on. It's between the two people involved, and unless there's someone who knows and understands one of them well, it isn't always apparent what's going on.

Here's how it often works though: The victim notices a potential partner (whether that was what that person was trying to accomplish or not), and (s)he intuitively guesses what behaviors that person will respond to. The victim behaves in a manner which is intended to entice/encourage the other person, his/her counterpart, into acting a certain way. If the victim's counterpart responds in a way that the victim is pleased with, the victim moves the relationship on to the next level. If the victim's counterpart fails to respond, takes too long to respond, responds in a way that the victim doesn't like, or tries to push things forward before the victim is ready to move on the the next step, (s)he did not pass the test. It's still possible that (s)he will still end up in a relationship with the victim, but it will be a frustrating experience for all. Victims are very difficult partners (and aggressors enjoy this... it's stimulating, and they enjoy the challenges the victim provides), and they only truly "surrender" (let themselves go) in a relationship in which their partner routinely passes their tests. The whole game is something that some people just do not have the patience for, but the process goes much more quickly when a victim's partner (or potential partner) is doing very well on the victim's tests. If a person does not do well on the tests, the victim may soon lose interest. Part of what doing well entails is quick, decisive action (Se).

A lot of people are confused by victims' behavior because they throw out bait, but once their potential partner gets around to closing in on the bait, the victim may have already decided that they didn't want to wait around for him/her to take the bait and reeled it back in. (This is compounded when they've cast the bait in a different direction and an aggressor who wasted no time in responding already took the bait.)

I think it's called "Victim/Aggressor" because the victim will sometimes do things to "provoke" the aggressor into teasing/picking on him/her (playfully). And because the aggressor is a challenger, and the one who is expected to actually make things happen (the victim just decides what and when lol).

I'm not totally certain how introversion/extroversion and male/female roles comes into play (ugh), and I feel it necessary to mention that crushes (attractions that are not meant to turn into relationships) won't generally follow the pattern I described above.

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[Joy]

It's not as contrived as I'm making it sound... that's just a very detached (and probably exaggerated) perspective of the whole thing. I imagine most of the time partners don't realize it's happening, it's just how they're naturally behaving with each other. Any forethought is generally unconscious, and people's different levels of maturity, wisdom, intelligence, and health are reflected in their interactions.

[Joy]

I'd even go as far as to say that it only feels like a game to the Ni/Se types when things aren't going smoothly... such as with a Ne or Si (or another Ni or Se) type. In fact, this is probably most obvious in a potential relationship between two extroverted victim types.

[FDG]

Ick. If someone wants to toy with me then they're more than welcome to go find someone else to bait.

Yeah. When baited, I bite. It's not that pretty. And smash things. And have road rage.

[Joy]

out of context

[Expat]

My fairly long-term relationship with an ENTj consisted of him continually baiting me (I'm guessing it would be what you call "games and tests"), I presume now in an attempt to get me to become aggressive? Anyway, it just got ugly. I'm sure he was unhappy with that too. I wish him well. Last I heard he was dating someone I know who is an ESFp. That's probably a better match than I was.

Could you elaborate on what you mean with "baiting"?

[Expat]

Ick. If someone wants to toy with me then they're more than welcome to go find someone else to bait. I have tested someone in the past, but in a rather limited sense, and with the purpose of trying to find out what his true intentions towards me were. I doubt that I'd do it again. I'd rather stick to straight-forwardness. Then I can know how things are without all the hoops to jump through.

Sure, but what Joy described is not "toying". Not intentionally. It's all due to the "would s/he really want me" question in the Victim's head. You're thinking of it as "toying" because you're looking at it from the point of view of an Aggressor

[Slacker]

It's been quite a few years now, but when he'd bait me he'd say something intended to get a rise out of me. Like he'd criticize something I was doing or whatever, but there was obviously this needling in it like wanting me to lash out at him or something. Or seeing how much I'd take before I'd lash out? Maybe if we'd been more compatible it would have turned into "playful banter" but that's now how it worked with me. It felt like criticism. I can't think of any specific examples off the top of my head but he seemed to think he was exhibiting a sense of humor when he'd criticize me so it's likely he didn't intend it as criticism but as teasing.

[Gilly]

Generally the Victim/Aggressor game is quite stimulating to both partners. In the case of this particular relation, such is not the case. The beneficiary does not possess the capability to allure and entice the benefactor, especially compared to the benefactor's dual or activity partner. The games and tests involved in Ni/Se interactions don't have as much of an appeal to one's benefactor because that's just the nature of those relations. Benefactors may find the games and tests annoying, may find them boring, etc. I think relations of benefit can be particularly frustrating for Ni type beneficiaries because their benefactors aren't all that responsive to their ploys. It can feel like a rejection.

I don't see what this has to do with specifically being Ni/Se. Sounds like all relations of benefit to me.

[Joy]

Because of the specific ways that INxps attract their partners.

[Gilly]

And where is that in this description?

[Joy]

Read the whole thread.

[Gilly]

I was commenting on the original description.

[Joy]

Generally the Victim/Aggressor game is quite stimulating to both partners. In the case of this particular relation, such is not the case. The beneficiary does not possess the capability to allure and entice the benefactor, especially compared to the benefactor's dual or activity partner. The games and tests involved in Ni/Se interactions don't have as much of an appeal to one's benefactor because that's just the nature of those relations. Benefactors may find the games and tests annoying, may find them boring, etc. I think relations of benefit can be particularly frustrating for Ni type beneficiaries because their benefactors aren't all that responsive to their ploys. It can feel like a rejection.

...as explained later in the thread

[Joy]

I originally wrote this for a PM and edited out like half of it before posting it to be respectful to people's privacy.

[Gilly]

So you think Ni/Se interactions are about playing games? And Ne/Si types don't play games? Whatever, Joy...

[Joy]

So you think Ni/Se interactions are about playing games?

Did you read the rest of the thread?

And Ne/Si types don't play games?

Where did I say that?

Whatever, Joy...

Yeah... I'm unwilling to argue with you.

[Gilly]

You're making it sound like playing games is attributable to Ni/Se more than anything else. I think this is bullshit. I think there is a specific type of game that they play, but you don't come anywhere close to any kind of specification of this sort, regardless of whether or not it coincides with my own idea, anywhere in this thread.

[Gilly]

And yes, I read the whole thread. Christ, woman.

[Joy]

Please, continue.

[Joy]

Game playing (as most people would define it) in relationships is a sign of immaturity, not type.

[Gilly]

You will immediately discredit anything I try to say about Ni/Se relations on authority. Why should I bother?

[Joy]

Authority?

And no... I really am curious about your views on how Ni/Se relations work. As I said, I'm not looking for an argument.

[Gilly]

You being an Ni type, and being able to say "No, it's not like that, I know from experience, blah blah blah."

And why would you give a shit about my opinion? Don't you already know, Joy?

[Joy]

I don't *KNOW* anything. And it's interesting to hear the perspective of different people. Not to mention that I no longer associate myself with a type.

[Olimpia]

Generally the Victim/Aggressor game is quite stimulating to both partners. In the case of this particular relation, such is not the case. The beneficiary does not possess the capability to allure and entice the benefactor, especially compared to the benefactor's dual or activity partner. The games and tests involved in Ni/Se interactions don't have as much of an appeal to one's benefactor because that's just the nature of those relations. Benefactors may find the games and tests annoying, may find them boring, etc. I think relations of benefit can be particularly frustrating for Ni type beneficiaries because their benefactors aren't all that responsive to their ploys. It can feel like a rejection.

I am thinking… why, and where you've got that impression from?

Would you say the Benefit relation between a Victim and an Infantile is actually better, opposed to Victim with Aggressor? Theoretically, that would not make much sense, considering Victim types often see Infantiles as irritating and unsatisfying, and the Infantile cannot keep up with the "game" as easily or enthusiastically as an Aggressor might.

[Joy]

I am thinking… why, and where you've got that impression from?

Would you say the Benefit relation between a Victim and an Infantile is actually better, opposed to Victim with Aggressor? Theoretically, that would not make much sense, considering Victim types often see Infantiles as irritating and unsatisfying, and the Infantile cannot keep up with the "game" as easily or enthusiastically as an Aggressor might.

I thought I was LIE for a long time. Maybe just ignore my posts in this topic...