Quote Originally Posted by Expat
Quote Originally Posted by misutii
ok it's a simple fact that a person usually blames the other person involved when the sex just isn't that great (maybe we don't do it out loud, but we do it in our heads) so now channel these criticisms into Gulenko's erotic attitudes.
I really think you should re-think this "simple fact". It is obviously true for you, and for other people, but not for everybody.
this has nothing to do with personal morality, but i must say your response does have "victim" attached to it. The purpose was to provoke people into thinking in a different way... while it didn't completely work I definitely got your attention. I think most of you interpreted what I was attempting to get to in the wrong way... I am not talking about sex in the terms of one night of sex or merely the act of it, but rather a person's general approach to it and how you react to that person's approach, especially over time. furthermore by "blame" i don't mean judgment of the person's essence, but of certain traits/habits/turn-ons/turn-offs. I think you think that when I said "blame" i meant to judge another as INHERENTLY inadequate and I resent that. I brought up this topic because it effects everyone. Finding another person with compatible sexual attitudes is important. sex isn't just a "bedroom" thing. Take into consideration the modern divorce rates and the effect divorce has on children. I've noticed lots of people think of sex as separate from everything else but I've never heard of any study that supported that belief. If a person is uncomfortable with their s/o in bed then, more often than not, that discomfort will extend into other aspects of the relationship. Being able to be yourself is integral to a person's health. Indeed that's what socionics and inter-type relations are there to prove. So yes, cultural and developmental factors definitely play a role in sex, they also definitely play a role in duality... maybe I'm just over-using my Ni right now but I don't understand how sex and socionics should be viewed as completely separate topics.

Anyways as I said this a difficult topic to tackle as it is going to naturally make lots of people react defensively. It's not something we really learn in school but through personal life experiences. The subject has a sort of societal taboo that's difficult to break. It's kind of like how some people define marriage as "compromise" or "sacrifice" (these kinds of people tend to be stuck in unfulfilling relationships but so is the majority of the population that has a relationship, and so such mistruths are perpetuated).

People need to be aware of the fact that despite all of the individualistic crap that our culture spouts (i.e. you can do anything you set your mind to / you are responsible for everything in your life) we have to remember that these concepts of "individual freedom" and "responsibility" are merely social constructs. They're rather recent and they're mostly confined to modern western culture. It's for this same reason that mbti's personality portraits are PC bullshit.

Here's a quote from Lytov's "Introduction to Socionics":

"According to Marx, economy was the basis of everything – including human relations. Augusta studied happy and unhappy marriages, and initially she relied upon Marx – she studied economic, social and cultural factors that took place in these families. However, she quickly realized that they were not enough. There were families, quite “normal” from the viewpoint of economic situation, cultural level etc., but unhappy anyway.
What was the reason of their unhappiness? Maybe sex? Augusta was not too shy in these matters (later she even published some articles on sexology)"

Thus I know many of you are quick to dismiss this concept of "erotic attitudes" but western bias should be taken into consideration when you do so. In my opinion it's not an issue of "IF" sex plays a role in type relations, but "HOW". Just because Gulenko's particular framework doesn't suit you it doesn't mean that his framework doesn't have a reasonable basis. I'm adamant to bring this up because this subject keeps coming up, again and again. Each time I notice that it's mostly the same people that feel justified in rejecting it all-together - meanwhile no one ever provides proper evidence for their rejection, like honestly, what do other russian socionists say in regards to this matter?