Is the male aggressor romantic-style outdated?

[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.