Is the male aggressor romantic-style outdated?

[SGF]

Do I need to remind you you are the guy who takes pics of himself showing the middle finger and uses them as profile pics?

Uh.. I don't see the connection.

[Dr PissBender]

Uh.. I don't see the connection.

I meant that you're pathetic and nothing you can say to me is valid, coz you suck.

[SGF]

I meant that you're pathetic and nothing you can say to me is valid, coz you suck.

y u hurt mah fefes Aaron? q_q ima go and cry in sbbds's tits.

[Dr PissBender]

y u hurt mah fefes Aaron? q_q ima go and cry in sbbds's tits.

Hmmmm, sbbbd's tits, hmhmmhmh

[FDG]

it's not about aggressor vs. victim, in general now it's a good time for extroverted women and introverted men and also a bit of a bad time for introverted women (who are socially forced into more "aggressive career" roles) and extroverted males (who are supposed to spend more time at home, etc. etc.)

[SGF]

Hmmmm, sbbbd's tits, hmhmmhmh

Never gonna happen.. ILI's get no titis.

[sbbds]

Who says I even have titis

[Dr PissBender]

Never gonna happen.. ILI's get no titis.

You can bruh, act victim-like and Se egos will want to hunt

[Dr PissBender]

Who says I even have titis

Pics or it didn't happen

[sbbds]

Pics or it didn't happen

Exactly. It didn’t happen

[Lord Pixel]

Totally. But it’s not a sweet rush to your self-esteem like you would expect. It’s more an idea like “I can’t believe this interesting person can lack so gravely in this inconsequential aspect of life. LOL. I can fix that.” But maybe each person is different.

I had an ENTp friend in college (whose type I figured out only recently and thanks to a couple of forum members). I don’t know if other types even pay attention to this, but I can tell when somone has gone home and is well-rested when I see them, there is a ‘passaggio’ from one state to the other. Well, a weekend would go by and when I met her the following Monday I swear she looked like she was still on a roll from the previous Friday. No transition at all, although it’s obvious she had slept and showered, etc. I felt the urge to rub her shoulders and make her ‘release’. Or comb her hair, which was a bird’s nest (but I refrained; I didn’t want to imply I thought there was something wrong with her). This could be Si caregiving.

BUT

On other aspects she was so much mature than I was. She could cook better than me, knew more pubs to hang out at, she could organize her schedule like a grown up… Because she was so efficient, a dynamic was established where she was the serious one and I made all the jokes that had her laughing for days. There was little goofiness in her I didn’t deliver any strong Si as it’s commonly understood and yet, there we were.

This urge is much appreciated.

[nanashi]

A male seems to need a modicum of testosterone to have any kind of sexual drive. Male drive (not testosterone) seems to linked to possessive, controlling/manipulative behaviour - like animals. This may not translate to observable aggression so I'll wait for a study involving orders of magnitude more than 120 people. In order to get laid one has to push into a crowd or schmooze a straggler; it's certainly not lay on one's back passive action.

a.k.a. I/O

Sex drive does not equal aggression nor manipulation nor controlling behavior.

[Rebelondeck]

Sex drive does not equal aggression nor manipulation nor controlling behavior.

Correct. Behaviour does depend on how the urge is managed but barring self-preservation, the animal instinct does tend to tempt males to get it done by any means necessary. Because most males don't act upon it doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.

a.k.a. I/O

[inaLim]

"New scientific evidence refutes the preconception that testosterone causes aggressive, egocentric, and risky behavior."https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091208132241.htm

incel or PUA ideology and myth but not science

That study is problematic and they overreached with that conclusion. It was a zero stakes analytical activity (negotiating for free money). They should have stopped at "testosterone doesn't make you an unreasonable negotiator." It's reaching too far to say it has no link with aggressive behavior.

There was no provocation (no threat)
There were no women (no sex)
The situation of free money was "win/win" unless you're a total jackass (no competition)
The stakes were none, unless they were recruiting desperately poor people (no risk)
There was no audience of women or peers watching (no social status)

You would have to be some kind of sociopath to fuck up a situation where researchers present you with free money and all you have to do is negotiate for it. That's an analytical activity, not an aggression trigger.

That's not the biggest problem, which is they didn't take personality into account. Testosterone doesn't turn mousy men aggro, it primes men who are already aggro for more aggression.


The design of this study is more relevant to what that other study attempts to claim.

Exogenous Testosterone Rapidly Increases Aggressive Behavior in Dominant and Impulsive Men
https://www.researchgate.net/publica..._Impulsive_Men

Direct link:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile...f9d8f4c9ab.pdf

Methods: The present experiment extends this work by examining whether acutely increasing T potentiates aggressive behavior in men. In a double-blind, placebo-controlled, between-subject design, healthy adult men (n = 121) were administered either T or placebo, and subsequently engaged in a well-validated decision-making game that measures aggressive behavior in response to social provocation. In light of prior correlational research, we also assessed the extent to which T's effects on aggressive behavior would depend on variability in trait dominance and/or trait self-control.

Results: Exogenous T on its own did not modulate aggressive behavior. However, T's effects on aggression were strongly influenced by variation in trait dominance and trait self-control. Specifically, T caused an increase in aggressive behavior, but only among men scoring relatively high in trait dominance or low in trait self-control.

Conclusions: These findings are the first to demonstrate that T can rapidly (within 60 minutes) potentiate aggressive behavior, but only among men with dominant or impulsive personality styles.

Note I said design. Don't mistake me for taking testosterone as the end-all-be-all of aggression, I have issues with this study too. It's just that other study's methodology was socially retarded. While the data is factually correct, they fundamentally misinterpret the nature of aggression when they strip away risk, provocation, sex, competition, social status and personality. Only an economist would have the tunnel vision to think money is a comprehensive testing ground for aggression or that man is motivated by money to the exclusion of all else.

[marooned]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/helenth...riods-persist/

I imagine if I were to take testosterone I'd become more aggressive. That doesn't mean I would become violent btw.

[SlytherinPower]

I mean like I actually don’t like it when I’m pursued, I think it’s a huge turnoff actually. But I still think more women prefer to have guys make more of the moves or ask them out or something. Maybe that “minority” is becoming less of a minority nowadays but it’s just my impression from the other women I’ve known. I think most women would still think of how I act as lowering myself somehow but I don’t see it that way.

Are you saying that you actually think there are equal if not more women who are like me?

I don't like being pursued & get turned off by it too. People find that strange usually when I tell them that. I'm like if someone approaches me right off the bat in that way, I feel like buying a ticket & hoping on a plane as far away from them as I can get. lol I don't know why I'm like that. Also, guys that don't get when your not interested & keep trying to message. Neediness is so not attractive, either.

I always say, if I'm interested in someone, they'll know. I'm extremely obvious. I've been just accepting being single now though, because mostly me trying to be the one to come on to men seems to scare them away instead. I feel like I've put myself in a no win situation.

I'll possibly be receptive to come ons from a guy friend once in a long while, but only if I already thought he was hot when I first met him but for some reason decided to befriend him instead of try and flirt with him at first.

[SlytherinPower]

Usually the person with the least sexual market value chases the one with the higher sexual market value

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.

[Number 9 large]

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

[SlytherinPower]

Read fhe first word of my fuckin comment

I'm unusual

[persimmonism]

platonically or romantically i'm only able to pursue the people i don't actually care about that much, but it's not rly fun and i usually have to pull back quickly or else i get this yucky feeling.

anyway, i like being the one pursued way more.

[Northstar]

I do wonder if the idea of different romance styles appeals to different quadras. The sociotype.com test does rank a test taker's romance styles.

In any case, many people I talk to outside of typology communities have openly fantasized about partners being "rough" with them, inside and outside the room, sometimes even going as far as describing the dynamics they crave as "abusive". But at the same time, they complain about the "drama" these things bring IRL, what "problems" these fantasies might bring IRL, and how men "disrespect" them IRL. "If he called me names or insulted me, I wouldn't stand for it" or "A man should take care of me and respect me, I don't see why women should have to take that kind of abuse".

So in a way, even if I do see the aggressor style still present for many people as a concept or as a fantasy, I don't think it's the dominant romance-style at the moment in western society.

The popularity of stuff like 50 shades of grey and 365 days proves that "sexual roughness" is a fairly common female fantasy today.
I don't see this necessarily being dictated by the romance styles, as in someone with infantile romance style might enjoy such fantasies and playing with those roles during sex, but in daily life (most of the time) expect a caregiver behavior instead.
The accuracy of romance styles depending on socionics type remains pretty good as long as we are using higher brain functions instead of raw hormones and basic reproductive urges. It's not at all uncommon to be sexually attracted to someone whose guts you hate personality-wise and vice versa. Estrogen and testosterone attract each other viscerally but often result in thought structures and values that are alien to each other.

[sbbds]

The popularity of stuff like 50 shades of grey and 365 days proves that "sexual roughness" is a fairly common female fantasy today.
I don't see this necessarily being dictated by the romance styles, as in someone with infantile romance style might enjoy such fantasies and playing with those roles during sex, but in daily life (most of the time) expect a caregiver behavior instead.
The accuracy of romance styles depending on socionics type remains pretty good as long as we are using higher brain functions instead of raw hormones and basic reproductive urges. It's not at all uncommon to be sexually attracted to someone whose guts you hate personality-wise and vice versa. Estrogen and testosterone attract each other viscerally but often result in thought structures and values that are alien to each other.

Totally agree with all of this. I’m an aggressor but also enjoy a certain degree of what could be considered roughness or animal-ness. I’m also attracted to the infantile style to a certain degree, and can find the caretaker style “positive” or “useful” in many circumstances and in that sense attractive. So I’m not solely attracted to people who are socionics victims, it’s just the attitude that I’m the most attracted to.

As for the last sentence, I agree but it’s obviously not those alone that lead to different socionics types or different values in general, which is what I think you’re probably alluding to.

[Dr PissBender]

Tbh. I am an infantile but I have gotten aggressive and possesive over Si egos on my super unhealthy days. I have a weak Se and I have issues controlling my impulses. (I have done some dark shit, to shit people who had hurt me first, tho.)

So it is like. Anyone can hurt and be violent. Even Se polrs.

[The Reality Denialist]

Eh isn't these romance styles about pulling the rug
under your feet the right way? Right kind of control of those attributes? Lol. It is somewhat fixed to a specific culture, I think.

[nanashi]

Correct. Behaviour does depend on how the urge is managed but barring self-preservation, the animal instinct does tend to tempt males to get it done by any means necessary. Because most males don't act upon it doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.

a.k.a. I/O

no, what I mean is LITERALLY testosterone does not appear to be linked to aggression. read the studies on it.

[Northstar]

no, what I mean is LITERALLY testosterone does not appear to be linked to aggression. read the studies on it.

It is linked to confidence and social dominance. Aggression depends on other genes that can be activated with high T levels.

[nanashi]

That study is problematic and they overreached with that conclusion. It was a zero stakes analytical activity (negotiating for free money). They should have stopped at "testosterone doesn't make you an unreasonable negotiator." It's reaching too far to say it has no link with aggressive behavior.

There was no provocation (no threat)
There were no women (no sex)
The situation of free money was "win/win" unless you're a total jackass (no competition)
The stakes were none, unless they were recruiting desperately poor people (no risk)
There was no audience of women or peers watching (no social status)

You would have to be some kind of sociopath to fuck up a situation where researchers present you with free money and all you have to do is negotiate for it. That's an analytical activity, not an aggression trigger.

That's not the biggest problem, which is they didn't take personality into account. Testosterone doesn't turn mousy men aggro, it primes men who are already aggro for more aggression.


The design of this study is more relevant to what that other study attempts to claim.

Exogenous Testosterone Rapidly Increases Aggressive Behavior in Dominant and Impulsive Men
https://www.researchgate.net/publica..._Impulsive_Men

Direct link:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile...f9d8f4c9ab.pdf

Note I said design. Don't mistake me for taking testosterone as the end-all-be-all of aggression, I have issues with this study too. It's just that other study's methodology was socially retarded. While the data is factually correct, they fundamentally misinterpret the nature of aggression when they strip away risk, provocation, sex, competition, social status and personality. Only an economist would have the tunnel vision to think money is a comprehensive testing ground for aggression or that man is motivated by money to the exclusion of all else.

The problem with the idea you're trying to support is that testosterone can help people get interested in who's socially acting out what role. THAT alone could be the reason SOME already aggressive people exhibited aggression. It doesn't mean that testosterone CAUSES aggression. being aggressive and getting a greater interest in who's doing what social role can be like getting sunglasses when you're Riddick...now you can see better, etc. Testosterone seems to be related to tring to figure out how to behave. It's not even about dominance. It can help with figuring out how the dynamic is right now with someone else coming up with ideas and organizing and inspiring and directing and all that. (although flat hierarchies do exist, too)

[nanashi]

"Moreover the study shows that the popular wisdom that the hormone causes aggression is apparently deeply entrenched: those test subjects who believed they had received the testosterone compound and not the placebo stood out with their conspicuously unfair offers. It is possible that these persons exploited the popular wisdom to legitimate their unfair actions. Economist Michael Naef states: "It appears that it is not testosterone itself that induces aggressiveness, but rather the myth surrounding the hormone. In a society where qualities and manners of behavior are increasingly traced to biological causes and thereby partly legitimated, this should make us sit up and take notice." The study clearly demonstrates the influence of both social as well as biological factors on human behavior."https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091208132241.htm

[Northstar]

Tbh economists are the biggest frauds there are and they shouldn’t be confused with actual natural scientists.

Bunch of hand waving and political opinions based on some weak statistics, not hard science.

[Aramas]

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”

I think the stereotypical interpretation of the "male aggressor style" is becoming less socially acceptable with time for many people. With all the "consent is sexy" stuff and asking permission going on, there's less room made socially for guys who want to be forward with potential partners, and less room socially for women (or others) who prefer an active advance. Asking permission and consent are nice things, but if it has to be as overt as some people want it to be, it's just going to kill sex & romance for some people. I personally like it when guys I like don't ask permission to do stuff. The more impetus they show on their own, the more attractive they are to me.

Sometimes my personal perspective is, "No, because you asked."

I don't think, though, that Se necessarily leads one to be aggressive in the way it's portrayed in Socionics articles.

There were two guys one night that I was attracted to at the club. The first one pursued me enough to get into a conversation and tried to get me back to his place. The second guy leaped off the side wall, and kissed me on the lips as his way of introducing himself to me. I went home with the second guy.

[SkyNova20]

There is no objective style of romance. However, the male-aggressor romance style has been dismissed and turned off by tons of people these days. For some reason, they don't find it enjoyable or acceptable. But then again, my knowledge of relationships is completely non-existent, so what do I know?

[xerx]

In my experience, girls that want you to approach them will make it really obvious. They'll look at you a lot and try to make eye contact. If they think you're really hot, they'll do a gesture where they swipe their hair to the side like H!tler.

[The Reality Denialist]

hmmm.. does the above statement have ILE bias.

[sbbds]

This reminds me. When my boyfriend (an ILE) first told me he liked me, I rejected him at first partially because it was too aggressive. After a couple of months when I got some space to think I realized I actually did like him the entire time and had to re-ask him out lol.

I like having the feeling of taking a risk when I ask the guy out or tell him I like him first. If the guy does it, it takes it away from me. It’s like serving a wild animal a pre-killed mouse ... at least wiggle it a bit first. It’s imperative to me.

[Adam Strange]

This reminds me. When my boyfriend (an ILE) first told me he liked me, I rejected him at first partially because it was too aggressive. After a couple of months when I got some space to think I realized I actually did like him the entire time and had to re-ask him out lol.

sbbds, this happens with the ESI's that I like, particularly the ESI-Se's. If I make any sign that I kind of like them, they get dismayed and dodge. This seems to be consistently true with this type. Eventually, they might think about it and will return to the conversation, but their first reaction is to hide or run away.

[sbbds]

sbbds, this happens with the ESI's that I like, particularly the ESI-Se's. If I make any sign that I kind of like them, they get dismayed and dodge. This seems to be consistently true with this type. Eventually, they might think about it and will return to the conversation, but their first reaction is to hide or run away.

You should be the one acting like you’re trying to hide. If the meat isn’t running, it’s not fresh.

[persimmonism]

This reminds me. When my boyfriend (an ILE) first told me he liked me, I rejected him at first partially because it was too aggressive. After a couple of months when I got some space to think I realized I actually did like him the entire time and had to re-ask him out lol.

I like having the feeling of taking a risk when I ask the guy out or tell him I like him first. If the guy does it, it takes it away from me. It’s like serving a wild animal a pre-killed mouse ... at least wiggle it a bit first. It’s imperative to me.

How exactly does it feel to you when someone is very aggressive, that makes it so you don't like it/them? can you pinpoint it?

[The Reality Denialist]

It seems like I have close to zero or even negative drive to even try. In one end lack of confidence could lead to dependent behavior hence need to bond and look for relationships... so it could be a driving force as well.

[sbbds]

How exactly does it feel to you when someone is very aggressive, that makes it so you don't like it/them? can you pinpoint it?

I think it’s what nanashi mentioned before earlier in this thread, that it can feel like they are not attuned to my desires or needs. I guess I just want to be the more active person, it feels unnatural to me otherwise... it’s as simple as that I think. I feel good when I make the decision, choose and get what I’ve chosen. I think when I was younger I had a lot of my natural desires usurped by overbearing family members, which is why I can’t stand being overbowled now.

I just want to be with someone who feels good about being chosen by me, and who chooses me back (in part because of that).

[persimmonism]

I think it’s what nanashi mentioned before earlier in this thread, that it can feel like they are not attuned to my desires or needs. I guess I just want to be the more active person, it feels unnatural to me otherwise... it’s as simple as that I think. I feel good when I make the decision, choose and get what I’ve chosen. I think when I was younger I had a lot of my natural desires usurped by overbearing family members, which is why I can’t stand being overbowled now.

I just want to be with someone who feels good about being chosen by me, and who chooses me back (in part because of that).

that makes a lot of sense when you explain it like that