Adventures in Dating

[spacious]

Re. the utility of dating apps for members of gay communities to find potential dating partners (indeed a huge deal, historically and socially),

I hope it's not too off-color of a comment that what if Adam's lesbian ESI-Se were ever to come onto the forum - having realized she wants a Dual , having continued to profit and proffer immensely in her friendship with him, and her sexual preference remaining for women - and share ideas with Armitage on the challenges of searching for a dual while gay.

[spacious]

I think that people become mean when they see no chance of them getting what they want. Usually because they have no clue about how to get what they want. Or because what they want is not something that anyone wants to give them.

you've given me here a helpful window into possible motivations behind my ENTJ, most definitely e8 brother's actions which I've found mystifying for much of my life.

[End]

I mean it more as in that it is very hard in real life to recognize if others are gay too, not to say nigh impossible. Dating apps make it actually possible to know when others are also looking for a guy. I'm a social fellow, but I'd never walk up to someone to ask them out without knowing first that they're gay too.

I try to confer to End that life is not all that categorical as he sometimes portrays it. Not everything is only black and white, nor are dating apps a purely good or bad thing. Yes, finding love through shared friends or interests is preferable, if this is actually an option. For those like me who are "different", or people who lack the confidence to walk up to others, or whatever reason one can imagine, dating apps provide an option to meet others who are looking, when the classical methods for finding love didn't work.

Like I said in this thread I believe my devaluing of "so" means I too wouldn't just up and ask someone if they're gay... but I'm also pretty sure about someone's sexual orientation after a few conversations and while I have not directly asked them about it the hints are all there. Hell, one gay couple came right up to me and told me how much they both liked me rather a lot at a previous job. Different times, different places, but they were loud and proud about their homosexuality in my presence pretty quickly after I got hired at least and I didn't give them any real shit about it. The ego-block one frequently teased me about how if he wasn't already committed to his partner he'd be trying to "convert" me and make me his date/partner.

I told him I was flattered, but that such a quest would never work out. I like the ladies, and there ain't nothing going to change that. Then there's the glaring issue of my faith and what it has to say about such things. I will not thump my bible at someone as that never seems to work but, like with the EII Freemason I knew and actually rather liked, I mentioned I was Catholic to their face and the catechism/church teachings are rather specific on this (and many other) issues. A mere/quick google search would reveal to them that I'm not exactly supportive of them or their life choices if I'm being serious about it.

Still flattered though. Doubt a hardcore lesbian would find a Catholic nun complementing her on her looks or on the wonderful scent of her perfume whilst believing her to be in need of Jesus in the form of directing her sexual urges towards males to be anything truly negative. It's kinda like that. Hate the sin, not the sinner. Conversions by the sword are ultimately temporary. Conversions by common ground, however, are why the hopes of the fulfilment of "The Great Commission" aren't but a mere pipe dream .

[FreelancePoliceman]

Err, yeah. It's a deadly sin for a reason. Matrimony (and all it entails) is the only licit form sexual urges can and should take (let alone be acted upon). It is sinful to passionately kiss or grope the breasts of a woman you aren't wed to. Once you are wed that flips and, like I said, becomes something to be celebrated. Imagine the abject horror of only having sex with your wife/husband but once a year! A most truly horrifying thing in the eyes and minds of any true believer! Yet for many, far too many, that's the horror movie in which they both live! The fact this is the case pains me deeply for they ought to be fucking like horny jackrabbits in all manners of ways.

Like I said, it is a grave misconception that us Catholics are sex hating prudes who extol, like some Anglican heretic who originated the phrase far as I can tell, that a woman should just "endure" sex as she "lies back and thinks of England" as if she's a robot who must procreate and produce children as per the demands of cold and its flawless conclusion that you gotta have kids to keep society going. Yeah, it says the act of making those kids is sick and disgusting but no kids=no civilization so it's a "necessary evil" as it were.

Bullshit! Not only is it not that at all it's a necessary good! Happily wedded couples lusting after each other with a fiery passion ought to be the kind of plotline that occupies the majority of the trashy romance novel section of a bookstore. That it is not speaks volumes as to the veracity of my other assertions in regards to us all being victims of narrative warfare and full-court press propaganda designed to immiserate us all.

I thought for some reason you'd have more thoughts on the rest of what I said. Anyway, I'm curious how you expect people to marry without first being attracted to each other. Or is it only one's personality that should attract?

[Armitage]

@End, your gay colleagues sound nice. I think that the joke he made is a bit odd, though, because of all people they should know that sexuality is genetic, and the joke also sounds rather promiscuous. All in all, the gay couple you met seem rather flamboyant, based on what you told me. I myself am far from flamboyant, most friends and family members I told that I'm gay were genuinely surprised, because they didn't see it. Subsequently, I don't feel attracted to flamboyant gay guys, but to guys like any other who happen to be gay, because I'm like that myself. It does make it a lot harder to identify fellow gay guys that way, however, hence the necessity for me to use dating applications. Despite that, yes, most people who are on there are self-indulgent sex addicts. Welcome to the gay hook-up culture.

[Armitage]

As an European I'm actually surprised to hear that it made you wonder about the ethicality of it, because for me it feels like the only right thing to do. The corpos sway the people to buy their products by lowering prices, via lowering the quality standard. Healthy food has high quality and is therefore more expensive than junkfood. It is called junkfood for a reason, after all, it is cheap to make and mostly waste products. For instance chicken chuggets are the remains of a chicken's carcass when the chicken fillet, the chicken wings, and every other quality meat has been removed. What remains are scrapes of meat, organs like the chicken's bowels, and bones. This is then all put into an industrial blender and mixed into a paste from which they produce your chicken nuggets. The carcass paste is then deep-fried, in order to obfuscate its taste. This is why junkfood isn't nutritious, because it's made from junk, from actual waste. Research has showed that pizza can be healthy, but only in Italy where pizzas are made from high-quality, fresh, and vitamin rich ingredients, such as fresh tomatoes, fresh fish, artisanal cheese, and good olive oil. In the United States of America, however, pizza is reduces to a mere junkfood, made from artificially sweetened ketchup, industrially produced cheese, the remains of the fish, and preserved olives. Were an artisanal Italian pizza baker to move to the United States, he would go bankrupt almost immediately, as not quality, but cheapness is what the American market competes on. And this is the sole consequence of the lack of a proper minimum income. Not only does the minimum wage in the States exclusively apply to civil servants, the minimum wage that they are entitled to is below any proper European living standard.

When libertarians argue against implementing a sugar tax with which to subsidize healthy foods, because it would limit autonomy, I point towards the lack of minimum income limiting people's autonomy to buy the more expensive healthy foods, when they desire to do so. Research has proved that people are fat not due to inherent moral deficiency, as libertarianism blames them with. Instead, they are fat due to the truly toxic environment that they live in leaving them no other choice than to keep consuming the junk that the corpos stuff down their throats, until these people literally die. Just look at the tobacco industry earning money from poisoning people and polluting the air with harmful carcinogens, while putting in addictive nicotine to ensure that the people continue buying their products, until they fall death! Libertarianism is merely a corporate propagandized ideology with which they reinforce their power over the people. For me it is thus a no-brainer to vote for anything that breaks the power of the corpos, which are poisoning us.

I liked the World Health Organization article that you posted, by the way. Also, heroin addiction is neither a choice, the Rat Park experiment has showed that poor parental contact and a lack of social support by friends and family predispose people towards the use of drugs, in order to numb their qualms. But in addition to this, heroin is also biologically addictive, so once people are hooked on it, it is important to provide them methadon freely, in order to wane them off their biological addiction. But without treating their lack of social support, steady income, and a social safety net to help them stay clean, they are likely to relapse. The government should take an active role in helping people rehabilitate from their addictions, because regardless of using the American libertarian or European utilitarian vantage point, drug addiction limits people's choice to stay clean, and it harms them, their family and friends, as well as society en large.

[spacious]

As an European I'm actually surprised to hear that it made you wonder about the ethicality of it, because for me it feels like the only right thing to do. The corpos sway the people to buy their products by lowering prices, via lowering the quality standard. Healthy food has high quality and is therefore more expensive than junkfood. It is called junkfood for a reason, after all, it is cheap to make and mostly waste products. For instance chicken chuggets are the remains of a chicken's carcass when the chicken fillet, the chicken wings, and every other quality meat has been removed. What remains are scrapes of meat, organs like the chicken's bowels, and bones. This is then all put into an industrial blender and mixed into a paste from which they produce your chicken nuggets. The carcass paste is then deep-fried, in order to obfuscate its taste. This is why junkfood isn't nutritious, because it's made from junk, from actual waste. Research has showed that pizza can be healthy, but only in Italy where pizzas are made from high-quality, fresh, and vitamin rich ingredients, such as fresh tomatoes, fresh fish, artisanal cheese, and good olive oil. In the United States of America, however, pizza is reduces to a mere junkfood, made from artificially sweetened ketchup, industrially produced cheese, the remains of the fish, and preserved olives. Were an artisanal Italian pizza baker to move to the United States, he would go bankrupt almost immediately, as not quality, but cheapness is what the American market competes on. And this is the sole consequence of the lack of a proper minimum income. Not only does the minimum wage in the States exclusively apply to civil servants, the minimum wage that they are entitled to is below any proper European living standard.

When libertarians argue against implementing a sugar tax with which to subsidize healthy foods, because it would limit autonomy, I point towards the lack of minimum income limiting people's autonomy to buy the more expensive healthy foods, when they desire to do so. Research has proved that people are fat not due to inherent moral deficiency, as libertarianism blames them with. Instead, they are fat due to the truly toxic environment that they live in leaving them no other choice than to keep consuming the junk that the corpos stuff down their throats, until these people literally die. Just look at the tobacco industry earning money from poisoning people and polluting the air with harmful carcinogens, while putting in addictive nicotine to ensure that the people continue buying their products, until they fall death! Libertarianism is merely a corporate propagandized ideology with which they reinforce their power over the people. For me it is thus a no-brainer to vote for anything that breaks the power of the corpos, which are poisoning us.

I liked the World Health Organization article that you posted, by the way. Also, heroin addiction is neither a choice, the Rat Park experiment has showed that poor parental contact and a lack of social support by friends and family predispose people towards the use of drugs, in order to numb their qualms. But in addition to this, heroin is also biologically addictive, so once people are hooked on it, it is important to provide them methadon freely, in order to wane them off their biological addiction. But without treating their lack of social support, steady income, and a social safety net to help them stay clean, they are likely to relapse. The government should take an active role in helping people rehabilitate from their addictions, because regardless of using the American libertarian or European utilitarian vantage point, drug addiction limits people's choice to stay clean, and it harms them, their family and friends, as well as society en large.

Armitage, indeed after making my post I started thinking about how I’d overlooked the targeting of communities that are already poor with these subpar health-harming foods. Exactly what you're pointing to, and I'm definitely in agreement in finding this immoral. I s’pose I’m so used to seeing moral villainization of people living in poverty and judgment of their choices, that I still react somewhat defensively in hearing about the tax issue. Like a fear that it could be a regressive tax, I suppose. Anyway, lots of great points you make 😉 good stuff.

[End]

I thought for some reason you'd have more thoughts on the rest of what I said. Anyway, I'm curious how you expect people to marry without first being attracted to each other. Or is it only one's personality that should attract?

There is a difference between looking at someone and appreciating their objective aesthetic attractiveness/value versus looking at someone and getting pornographic visions of the most lurid and debauched kind. Classical European art is pretty much as objective of an example as you can get if I'm being honest. Naked people were everywhere in many a piece, yet you'd be hard pressed to call it porn unless you're a puritanical nutjob (or an SJW but I repeat myself).

Attraction can take many a form but for most people the ideal is that one finds the other intellectually interesting/attractive whilst also being pleasing enough to the eye. As I've said many times elsewhere, a woman who is an HB7 can literally get any man she truly desires if she knows what she's doing and it's quite realistic for all but the most genetically disadvantaged to attain that. Same logic works in regards to a man. A "7" is the standard most sane individuals would agree is "pretty attractive" physically. No, she's no Aphrodite in the case of a female and he ain't no Adonis in the case of a male. But they're still pretty darn "cute" as women would put it in this context. As in, someone they wouldn't terribly mind fucking/marrying Ceterus Paribus. He ain't no Jason Momoa, but he's still quite fetching. Again I point to the concept of not allowing the perfect to become the enemy of the good.

It's a combination of both factors. The physical appearance draws you in initially but, well, I forget the exact passage but it's in the bible. Flesh is like grass and the comeliness therein is as the flowers in the field. Grass fades, flowers whither, but the eternal word of God endures forever. That is, no matter how hot he/she is now, that will eventually go away. Age claims the looks of even the most objectively sexy people. Who are they beyond that pretty face or abs you could grate the hardest of cheeses on? You may notice them for their appearance, but that is but the initial seed. The "first step" as it were.

You propose a date to those you find physically attractive. You get on one knee and propose to enter into the covenant of matrimony to the one person you're well and fully willing to tie your very soul to. I can only give a male perspective here but here's how it works from my end. The HB10 Aphrodite incarnate looking bitch is probably a great fuck, but she'd be a terrible mother and fucking hell she's nuts! Her distant cousin is a frumpy HB6 who could hit 7 if she knew how to do her makeup right. We'll throw in her being my dual as a bonus as few people consider the possibility that any type acts and lives in ways that don't exactly match up with the stereotypes associated with them. An SEE who can't really get how to best do herself up with a makeup kit. Interesting possibility.

Point is (and this frequently happens in well written romance novels) the man will take the HB6-7 over the HB10 because looks aren't everything. The 10 is a ball busting future Karen. The 6-7 is a wonderfully caring mother to his many children. Again, looks fade, but the word endures. I'd think it works similarly for women. A rich bastard may have the money, but that poor yet hard working, thrifty, and uncompromising man is the one they'd rather get hitched to. Yeah, he's "below" her, but he really isn't where it truly counts. End of the day he's fully and truly "masculine" and the rich little bitch is anything except...

[Minde]

Unrelated to the most recent topic in this thread - just reminiscing:

I've had two men who told me they weren't ready for a relationship and then within less than 4 months both started dating other girls. (These events were not at the same time; I think they were separated by a couple of years at least.) Much later I found out that one of those men considered me "the one that got away" and the other I have some suspicions that he felt regret as well.

It's really confusing to me and was quite hurtful at the time. Why did they do that?

I do think I ended up better off without them, but they aren't terrible people either.

[Bethanyclaire]

@Minde thanks for sharing, I m gonna think on this :/

[Adam Strange]

Out of curiosity, by "knows what she's doing," do you mean she's an expert at flirting, at doing her makeup, at picking outfits, or what?

But regardless of what you meant, I don't think there's a way for any human being to guarantee the (initial or ongoing) attraction of another, regardless of how much effort they put into their appearance or how nice their personality is. It seems overly idealistic to say that a girl can "literally get any man she truly desires" if she's not among "the most genetically disadvantaged." And I'd say the same goes for guys, as they have no way to ensure that the girl of their dreams reciprocates their feelings.

Isn't this the whole purpose of basement dungeons?

[Adam Strange]

Unrelated to the most recent topic in this thread - just reminiscing:

I've had two men who told me they weren't ready for a relationship and then within less than 4 months both started dating other girls. (These events were not at the same time; I think they were separated by a couple of years at least.) Much later I found out that one of those men considered me "the one that got away" and the other I have some suspicions that he felt regret as well.

It's really confusing to me and was quite hurtful at the time. Why did they do that?

I do think I ended up better off without them, but they aren't terrible people either.

@Minde, I don't think that my EII secretary is "the one who got away", but I've been taking her out to lunch and dinner for ten years and man, she's perfect in public. She seems to like me, too.

Well, actually, I know she likes me. I'm pretty sure she has considered marriage, and to tell you the truth, I could do a lot worse. I also felt this way with my EII physical therapist. They are both infinitely warm and sensible, and the only fly in the ointment is the fact that we can't influence each other very well.

That's my experience with EIIs. If your guys were LSEs, then I'd say that they were probably just clueless, or were waiting for someone to show them unequivocal Fi, and maybe they didn't even know it until later, after you'd shown them what it is and they'd had time to think about it.

Te-doms can be pretty obtuse.

[Minde]

They might have genuinely thought they weren’t ready for a relationship and/or was their way of “rejecting” (some people can say that when they reject you, as opposed to simply saying they are not interested). Then they may have come across someone they liked to where they wanted to date

but in retrospect they may have realized they liked you as a person and/or more or saw potential there that they didn’t pursue and now regret it.

an SLI I liked said he wasn’t looking for a relationship either only like 1-2 years later ending up with an IEE. I don’t think he was lying really, he was sx last and contributed; what was priority to me certainly wasn’t to him. But he also didn’t see me that way, which I sensed too without him saying it. But I wish they would say that lol

I know, right?! I can empathize with not actually being certain of what you want and with not wanting to hurt another person or burn any unnecessary bridges. But it sure makes it easier to receive when there's both a balance of grace and honesty. Like even a "I just don't think we're a good match" might be annoyingly vague for anyone who wants to improve, but it's more honest than other things.

@Minde, I don't think that my EII secretary is "the one who got away", but I've been taking her out to lunch and dinner for ten years and man, she's perfect in public. She seems to like me, too.

Well, actually, I know she likes me. I'm pretty sure she has considered marriage, and to tell you the truth, I could do a lot worse. I also felt this way with my EII physical therapist. They are both infinitely warm and sensible, and the only fly in the ointment is the fact that we can't influence each other very well.

That's my experience with EIIs. If your guys were LSEs, then I'd say that they were probably just clueless, or were waiting for someone to show them unequivocal Fi, and maybe they didn't even know it until later, after you'd shown them what it is and they'd had time to think about it.

Te-doms can be pretty obtuse.

You are not these men. I'm fairly sure both are Alpha SFs, one SEI and the other ESE.

After I got married, the ESE went and married a woman who looks a lot like me but who might be LII, though I haven't interacted with her enough to be confident in that. Her wedding dress was almost identical to mine, heh. The SEI is currently single, possibly forever; I think he might be giving up on romance, which is a shame because I think if he pulled himself together a little he'd be a great partner.

I will advise you this: please be sure to be clear with your EII secretary that you're hanging out with her because you like her company as a platonic friend and you still have no interest in any sort of romance. Perhaps even offer to stop hanging out if it gets too confusing to her. And maybe bring it up every so often, especially if she gets flirty. I know you mean no harm but this kind of thing can really hurt.


----------------------------------

[wall of text incoming:]

Thinking more about it, while both were hurtful, it was the SEI who triggered the most anger in me, while the ESE was more... disappointing. The SEI I more or less figured out (in terms of what the pattern is, not his solution per se or what precisely led to his hangups); the ESE still confuses me.



With the SEI, I eventually figured out I was part of a pattern of him getting infatuated with a woman, being very friendly and preferentially chummy, but avoiding any sort of commitment or purpose. "Let's just see where things go" that went nowhere. That had led to a LOT of hurt women, including quite a few in our mutual friends' circles. After he officially rejected me then shortly after started officially dating another woman (who he said "forced" him to do it or she would stop hanging out with him), he had the gall to restart flirting with me and tell me that I was "very special" to him. I got SUPER angry at that, lost my attraction to him, and basically cut him off for a couple of years. He went on to hurt another mutual friend and now seems to have given up on relationships.

Now that I'm married, I'm slowly letting him back at amicable arms length - in part because he's a friend of my husband (they knew each other before me) and he's pretty lonely what with COVID divisions and his inability to forge lasting relationships. My husband knows all about the whole story and is ok with how things are and with continuing to invite him to group things.



The ESE, on the other hand, had a history of a couple of committed relationships prior to me coming along. So I know he knows how to start and wants to sustain a relationship. His first main one lasted several years until she left him because he didn't want to get married. Super understandable on her part IMO, but it sent him into a tailspin of depression that took him awhile to climb out of. But he did and started dating another girl who ended up cheating on him then breaking up with him. When he and I met, unlike the SEI he fairly quickly asked me out on actual dates, but a couple months in was when he pulled the "I'm not ready for a relationship" saying he really liked me but didn't have the time to properly commit to a relationship because he was working full time + in school. So, I mean, that seemed very reasonable to me. Sad for me because I liked him but I do support hard work and goals and boundaries and such.

A few months after that I'm talking with a mutual female friend (who I met through him) and turns out they've been spending a LOT of time together to the point where they both agreed they were in a relationship. She, however, was complaining to me that he then said he couldn't date her because he needed to focus on school. ... She also said he'd "told her all about me," which makes me curious because what exactly was there to tell? When she moved out of state shortly after that, she asked me to "take care of him." I was like, he doesn't talk to me so how am I supposed to do that, lol?

After all that he'd flirt with me at various group get togethers, even getting a little touchy when tipsy. We'd had a good amount of physical attraction. But then he'd also avoid me, particularly any alone time. There was one point where I gave him one more opportunity to make a move, a sort of open door, and he literally walked away and left me standing in an awkward spot. (As an ESXj I KNOW he knew what to do and he chose not to.) So decided I wasn't going to wait around for him anymore, did more dating, and eventually started seriously dating my now-husband (who is all the things these two other jokers were not).

What was and is still weird to me is how the ESE was obviously attracted but there was so much confusing avoidance. He'd lurk around me at friend get togethers, come up and tell me I'm pretty and even put his hand on my knee, then go to the other side of the room and avoid eye contact. Even the last time I talked with him at his wedding he did this sort of word vomit babbling of his thoughts/feelings (wherein he gave a muddled explanation of why he started dating his now-wife, because "he realized he did have time after all and life was getting away fro him") and then *poof* ran off.



I just... people are weird, y'all.

Thanks for listening as I process. Advice and insights still welcome haha.

[End]

Out of curiosity, by "knows what she's doing," do you mean she's an expert at flirting, at doing her makeup, at picking outfits, or what?

But regardless of what you meant, I don't think there's a way for any human being to guarantee the (initial or ongoing) attraction of another, regardless of how much effort they put into their appearance or how nice their personality is. It seems overly idealistic to say that a girl can "literally get any man she truly desires" if she's not among "the most genetically disadvantaged." And I'd say the same goes for guys, as they have no way to ensure that the girl of their dreams reciprocates their feelings.

When I say she "knows what she's doing" I'm essentially saying that she's doing what comes naturally for those who lack attachment issues and has a bit of intellect to back it up. She won't second guess herself. She won't try to "earn" the love and affection of her paramour. She'll act as though it is already given. Same thing for if we flip the genders.

You are correct about there being no guarantees in regards to securing the gaze/consideration of a given target of your romantic affections. Once that gaze has been secured in whatever way, however, that's when it becomes a quantity that can be objectively measured.

To clarify my point about the HB7 from a male's perspective. You have no idea what men really and truly want. Sex? Yeah, we do. But that's not what we really want in the ultimate end if we're not among the lost. I cannot find the picture I saw in my mind that spells this out so hard it hurts but I can describe it. "Men only want one thing and it's disgusting" was the caption. The picture? An average looking woman earnestly embracing her average looking man as if she was his lover. The man was/is likely crying his eyes out and she just embraces him without question or words with a serene and peaceful countenance.

If you're a girl try doing that for your prospective lover. Just hug him, pull him close, stroke his hair, and tell him how much you appreciate him for just being himself. If he really starts to cry don't push him away, just embrace him more tightly. You might get a love confession or even a wedding proposal out of that exchange right out! Or you'll finally get him to drop his mask in the desperate hope that you, perhaps you, can love him for who he truly is...

Or he'll run away from you in abject terror and refuse to see that you were being honest. If he does than he was one of "the lost" as I put it. Pray for him. Pity him. But don't pursue him all that strongly. The lost are lost, only divine intervention will be able to fix them I'm sad to say. If you yourself managed to fix such a specimen than you had divine backing...

[spacious]

The cutting someone off thing that ESIs are apparently famous for? I honestly don't think I ever did it until I had to stop trying to be friends with an ILE that I had been involved with. I really, REALLY didn't want to have to do it, and I still kept him on facebook as a friend (where we remain), but I let him know that I'd been experiencing a significant amount of mental and emotional stress in managing our interactions and toggling between how he engaged with me and my ideal version of how he would engage. I told him that I was really grateful we had had the chance to have an honest, and fun, conversation a few months prior, and communicated in more fluency and depth than we had when we were actually seeing each other. I told him that I saw a very bright future for him and was excited for his next steps, graduating with his PhD and starting a new assistant professor gig.


He did not write back, but did keep me on social media, but without engaging (fortunately, or I would not have gotten what I needed and asked for. That whole 'breadcrumbing' thing of a possible or former romantic interest sending ambiguous signals of interest via social media is frickin' real and trying to manage my Fi boundaries around not engaging with him sexually or romantically again would eat me up for days after a single interaction between us.


I have his profile on Facebook hidden (I unfollowed the Instagram one then, since it's public and my algorithm would've still tried to show me his stories when the stories would pre-load, before pushing them to the back...) and I checked it once, a few months ago, when I saw he'd unfollowed me on Instagram, where my account is private--this was about one year after we'd stopped communicating. I scrolled through the page and he seemed great and just his usual self, which I suppose was a relief, haha- like, no news is good news, type thing.


I think with your conflictor there can be a back and forth between admiration and repulsion, and I think we both had that for each other, for sure. The whole relationship was basically meant to be a short-lived fling with a pre-set expiration date when he was moving away after a few months, but I had not anticipated just how attached, emotionally, I would become to him, in a period of 2.5 months, and how the dynamic would continue to play out over social media for over a year to follow, with months of no contact (alternately initiated by each party) in between.


Upon deciding to go out with him from Tinder, I was in a period of my life where I felt I was changing at an enormously fast rate, through a ton of effortful exertion, and I felt I was lacking a person in my life who could deeply witness my growth and change and 'new self', and reflect back to me who I was becoming. I didn't have, back then, the inner resources and 'tools' that I have now, and some of my relationships weren't as close, too, particularly since they were new, I was 1.5 years into living in a new city, in a new grad program which was basically a 'total institution' (all encompassing environment for your self-definition, roles, expected behavior, etc), becoming a new me. My ILI friend was planning to marry her long-term partner that spring. My EII friend had found love over the winter break. My IEE friend seemed to have joyful whimsicality and exploration through something I thought of as 'casual dating' and that I thought I could try. I thought I deserved to have some fun, that I could tap into sides of myself that I felt more comfortable with than the academic capacities I'd been trying to develop - namely, relationship building and my erotic capital (eva illouz' term...) - and certainly, by Robert Weiss' definition of emotional isolation as lacking a generalized attachment figure, I was isolated and, thus, lonely.


Since that time in my life, I haven't dated much. In the immediate few months after the ILE left town, as scheduled, I went on two dates with two different Indian grad students at my school. One of them seemed to really like me, but I told him I was not looking to engage in hookup culture, which was the vibe and behaviors he had, to my disappointment, pursued on our date.


I also stopped intermittently flirting or being with an IEE who had pursued me at a mutual friends' party the summer prior.


A few weeks before lockdown started, a sweet guy and classmate in the only class I was taking that semester asked me out, on Feb 13, 2020, lol, the day before V-Day, for a date that Saturday night. I sensed that we did not have chemistry but I don't think I'd ever been asked out by a peer before and he was really sweet about it, so I said yes, had more fun getting ready for the date than on the date, though it wasn't awful, and let him know the following week that I didn't feel it clicking between us. Later heard through his officemate that he'd been really excited abt asking me out and disappointed that it wasn't working out, but that he sensed it too.


/


TBH during the pandemic I don't think I've had the time, mental space, interest, or energy in dating. I'm pretty fed up with how we organize dating and feel that there *have* to be some better ways out there to meet someone than to do all the things I've tried before (apps, speed dating, apps again). If you read Beth Bailey's book From the Front Porch to the Back Seat you learn about the historical and social origins, basically invention of "dating" as we know it and to me it just reinforces that it doesn't have to be this way. Currently, I'm not really looking to meet a romantic prospect. My friendships are evolving and somewhat in flux, my identity is changing, I'm learning practical skills I've never tried to learn before and I'm thinking about what I want for my future professionally. Anyway, that's where I'm at with things, these have been some of my 'adventures'.

[Adam Strange]

I took an ESI out a few times last summer. We had sex a few times and it was actually excellent, but she said she didn't want to be in a relationship, and she made herself unavailable for a couple months.

I took her out for dinner after that, and as we were getting up from the table, I asked her if she'd kissed anyone since our last date. She seemed surprised at the question, then laughed and said no. So I kissed her.

You can't be too careful about germs.

She still didn't want to be in a relationship, so I drove home.

I think she basically wants a man to do yardwork, to do her accounts, and maybe for occasional sex. She certainly doesn't seem to want a roommate.

A few years ago, when I was collecting all the information I could about ESIs from the web, I ran across this article by Sergey Beletsky, which was so badly garbled from the original Russian that it was almost entirely incomprehensible, but it's title was easy enough to understand.

How to become necessary for the 'self-sufficient' Dreiser
Author: Sergey Beletsky

Introduction. Is it worth it to be necessary?


The article purported to explain how Jack is to become necessary to the independent Dreiser. Someday, I'd love to know the answer to that, but the article was entirely word-salad.


*EDIT*
I just did some research, and I found the original article. It is here: https://socionic.ru/index.php/2010-1...chnogodraizera

And Google Translate has come a very long way since I first used it. The article is actually readable now.

[Adam Strange]

As I've said many times elsewhere, a woman who is an HB7 can literally get any man she truly desires if she knows what she's doing and she already has the guy's consideration.

Ah okay, I understand what you were saying now. Just wasn't able to make the correct inference regarding what (I think) was an implicit qualification in your original statement. ^

I thought you were saying a girl can attract any dude she desires, and that's blatantly false/idealistic—hence why I responded in the way that I did.



My Dad has said on many occasions that he was interested my Mom because she was gorgeous and a Christian so I guess I've grown up believing that those characteristics are the the main two things guys want in a romantic partner: a similar worldview and physical attractiveness.

That belief is probably (at least part of) the reason that I've grown up worrying about whether I'm pretty and obsessing over my appearance to the extent that I do. And probably also the reason for why I find myself wondering if guys' lack of romantic interest in me signifies that I'm ugly.



Awe, that sounds pretty cute and wholesome.

EDIT: I keep trying to fix the weird quote split but it won't go away. Oof, that's annoying.

@Dreymagine, my criteria for marrying my ex-wife seems to have been 85% Would she make a good mother to our children, 10% similar life views and intelligence and similar attractiveness, and 5% She can do stuff that I can't.
She happens to look great, but that wasn't the main thing I was looking for.

As a Te dom who knows a few LSEs, my guess is that LSEs are looking for a caring, competent woman who is good with kids and is respectable in church and in public, and that's about it. I've seen some of these guys married to women who looked like forty miles of bad road, and they are still entirely devoted and loving husbands.

Oh, and speaking of women who would not make it on Fox News, I've dated quite a few and their looks were never an issue. But if I thought that they would be bad mothers, they were gone.

To an LXE, Fi isn't 40 million colors, it's a two-position switch.

[Adam Strange]

Unless everyone I know is a liar, people see me as very respectable/competent/intelligent (except for the people at my workplace, who may very well think I'm a moron since I sometimes end up having to ask for help with simple things like starting a gator and I take x3 as long as everyone else to clean a bathroom or a cabin), so I don't see why guys wouldn't like me if those are truly their greatest concerns.

Maybe they think I'd be bad with kids? I might be bad with kids; I have no clue since I've never tried babysitting and my parents never made me help out with my younger sisters when they were little. And if I don't know whether I'm bad with kids, I don't see how any guys possibly could.

What if I'm just so awesome that they're all intimidated? Maybe I'd go with that if I could delude myself into believing it lol.

@Dreymagine, are you saying that guys aren't hitting on you in droves? That's probably a good thing, given the quality of most guys.

My impression of EIIs is that they are understated, serious, smart and caring. Not exactly what a drunk guy is going to go for if he just wants to get laid that evening.

It's really a mistake, in my opinion, to try to be what you're not, or to try to get with every person of the opposite sex who comes along. I think it's far better to go for the people who are right for you. In your case, that would be LSE-Tes, and in my experience, they are dumb as rocks when it comes to romance. (Sort of like me, to be honest.)

Your job, as an EII, is going to be to first identify a high quality LSE, and then hang out with them for a while. They will quickly become accustomed to you and they might even start thinking about doing stuff with you, like inviting you to a gun show, or to a church social. At all times, you will have to gently steer these guys in the direction you want them to go, because their minds are on fishing, hunting, and looking at houses they want to buy.

Fortunately, if you just hang out around them, Duality will happen if they aren't hopelessly clueless.

You should talk to @Minde if you get the chance. She's dated several LSEs and she has some experience with them.

[Armitage]

Yes, like Adam says, expect your duals to be completely clueless and to even continue tripping over themselves, if they finally do understand that you're interested into them. But probably you would have to hit the LSE with it over their head first, Te-users aren't great at picking up subtle clues. And I believe this to be worse for those whose intuition is less developed.

[Armitage]

@wonderwoman, what could the guy have done better and would there have been a way in which he could have made up for his wrongs after you decided to drop him?

[Dreymagine]

@Dreymagine, are you saying that guys aren't hitting on you in droves? That's probably a good thing, given the quality of most guys.

It's really a mistake, in my opinion, to try to be what you're not, or to try to get with every person of the opposite sex who comes along.

Tis true. I guess what I was saying is not that I want all guys to hit on me in droves lol but that I wish at least one quality dude would like me. I just need to stop being so impatient about that happening. I don't know why I feel impatient about it since I'm perfectly capable of being independent. Maybe it's just FOMO since I see all my friends having been in multiple relationships already, I see (unrealistic) romantic relationships are in every book/movie I consume, etc.

I think it's far better to go for the people who are right for you. In your case, that would be LSE-Tes, and in my experience, they are dumb as rocks when it comes to romance. (Sort of like me, to be honest.)

Your job, as an EII, is going to be to first identify a high quality LSE, and then hang out with them for a while. They will quickly become accustomed to you and they might even start thinking about doing stuff with you, like inviting you to a gun show, or to a church social. At all times, you will have to gently steer these guys in the direction you want them to go, because their minds are on fishing, hunting, and looking at houses they want to buy.

Fortunately, if you just hang out around them, Duality will happen if they aren't hopelessly clueless.

You should talk to @Minde if you get the chance. She's dated several LSEs and she has some experience with them.

Hm, not interested in dual-hunting, especially if I've gotta steer some romantically clueless person.

Even if I thought duality was a real thing and not the construction of a pseudoscience, I don't know how to VI people (or even type based on personality without knowing them extremely well) so that wouldn't be a viable option for me.

[Milo]

I met a really nice and attractive woman from Tinder. We went to a concert together. Based on pics and our conversation I had hoped that she could be LII, but I think she is an ILI. She is really nice, a normalizer. I could see IEI also, but I think ILI fits better.

So, it felt kindof awkward, because in a way it was nice, but the incompatibility was also clear to me. Should I write her and explain that I think she's nice but I don't think we are compatible? These situations are hard.

Say from past dating experiences we have interests in common and I would like to attend another concert, some other activity with to you, but in relational sense I'm looking for someone else and hope she doesn't persist. This has always been awkward.

"I'm breaking up with you, not because I don't like you, but because I follow the teachings of an obscure Russian cult that says you and I could never be happy together."

Lithuanian cult and Ukrainian. Give credit where it's due.

[Armitage]

@Dreymagine, I think that Adam means that they're more clueless in the sense of recognizing when someone actually likes them. Even if love would be right in front of their noses, they wouldn't recognize it. That doesn't mean, however, that they don't cherish it, as a Te-user myself, I know we feel deeply. It's just hard for us to recognize if someone loves us, because we don't particularly love ourselves. That's the consequence of one dimensional Fi, we feel that we have to prove that we are lovable by being successfull. ( Don't ask, though, for the success rate of this strategy, but it's a very Te-way of approaching Fi-problems. )

I don't know how to type based on personality without knowing them extremely well so that wouldn't be a viable option for me.

Just go for the no-nonsense guy who is always on time or five minutes early at every activity, chances are that he's an LSE or SLI.

[adage]

Tis true. I guess what I was saying is not that I want all guys to hit on me in droves lol but that I wish at least one quality dude would like me. I just need to stop being so impatient about that happening. I don't know why I feel impatient about it since I'm perfectly capable of being independent. Maybe it's just FOMO since I see all my friends having been in multiple relationships already, I see (unrealistic) romantic relationships are in every book/movie I consume, etc.

So, your friends were in multiple relationships, seems like they are just as lost, incapable of finding love as you are but in their own way. Some people just date whoever will sort of want of them and that's not better than staying single.
Y'all are looking for the same thing in different ways imo.
Being married doesn't mean having found it, the mess will only be much bigger if it doesn't work.
Some people seems more sensitive to the eventual fallout than others, others prefer having something now and picking up pieces later.

To each their own, mistakes or not.

[Adam Strange]

This does seem like good advice for identifying LSEs because there's only two people I know IRL who I suspect of being LSEs, and they're the only people I've met who I would consider no-nonsense.

One was a teacher at my high school—an extremely multi-talented one, who taught Spanish, Latin, Old Testament, calculus, and physics. I think we dualized; she thought I was the best student ever and I thought she was the best teacher ever.

@Dreymagine, your teacher was very likely a Dual. My SLI son had one teacher whom he liked and who liked him, and she was IEE.

The other is a girl I played basketball with and now work with. I didn't dualize with her; I typically get along with everyone, but our personalities clash. She's very critical of me (and in a way that is not even remotely constructive).

Most likely an SLE, if she looks like an LSE. It's common for Conflictors to clash pretty quickly, but Duals either get along effortlessly or they don't, especially if one of them is screwed up in a non-Socionics way.

I can't think of any guys I've met who seem like LSEs, though. I wonder if they're rare or something.

LSEs are not rare. They are only rare in your circles.

Go to a hardware store or a Home Depot or a Lowes and look helpless. Ask for help from the big guy who is stolid and square-looking. He'll most likely be an LSE. SLIs hang out there, too, but they are more slender and bouncy and less ponderous.

[adage]

They're currently in love with & dating great guys, and all the couples intend to marry eventually. It's true that their past relationships didn't work out, but it's clear to me that they're not lost or incapable of finding love.

I must say I find this too quick to truly judge how in love or how great anyone is. But 10 years together would only convince me 30% at most, 50 years maybe 50% if, a bunch of if's.
Forgive my ILI-ness, it's showing a lot today.

[Armitage]

I can't think of any guys I've met who seem like LSEs, though. I wonder if they're rare or something.

To me, they're a dime in a dozen, but that might be because I'm interested in activities that they enjoy too, because of our shared Te-primary. For instance in my programming master class, as we share an interest in technology. My father is also a LSE and I share my interest into technology with him. He graduated as an electrotechnical engineer specialized in computers. I also have gotten to know some through my political activities. Although I myself am progressive and LSEs in my experience in the Netherlands tend to be more conservative, I have gotten to know some through the NATO youth I'm a member of, since we all value protecting Europe against certain conflicts at the Ukranian border. They are more engaged in it out of an apparent sense of duty and protecting one's lifestyle, whereas I'm interested into the geopolitics and the long-term consequences that the Ukranian War will have.

Your former teacher does potentially sound like a Te-user, as we enjoy knowing a lot about a lot of different topics. We enjoy accumulating knowledge like a personified library.
The girl you played basketball with actually sounds to me more like a Beta ST. I don't know if she's very competitive in sports, but if she is, she probably is a Beta ST.

[Dreymagine]

To me, they're a dime in a dozen, but that might be because I'm interested in activities that they enjoy too, because of our shared Te-primary. For instance in my programming master class, as we share an interest in technology. My father is also a LSE and I share my interest into technology with him. He graduated as an electrotechnical engineer specialized in computers. I also have gotten to know some through my political activities. Although I myself am progressive and LSEs in my experience in the Netherlands tend to be more conservative, I have gotten to know some through the NATO youth I'm a member of, since we all value protecting Europe against certain conflicts at the Ukranian border. They are more engaged in it out of an apparent sense of duty and protecting one's lifestyle, whereas I'm interested into the geopolitics and the long-term consequences that the Ukranian War will have.

Yeah, might be that we have 0 shared interests. You've described them as being interested in technology and active in politics. Adam described them as generally loving to hunt and fish. I don't resonate with any of that lol.

Your former teacher does potentially sound like a Te-user, as we enjoy knowing a lot about a lot of different topics. We enjoy accumulating knowledge like a personified library.

Yep, personified library would be a good way to describe her. Really knowledgeable lady.

The girl you played basketball with actually sounds to me more like a Beta ST. I don't know if she's very competitive in sports, but if she is, she probably is a Beta ST.

She was super competitive, and I think SLE might be a good fit for her.

EDIT:

Interestingly, we were both highly competitive in different ways tho. She was always super focused on beating the other team, as you're supposed to be. In contrast, I secretly fixated on being my own team's MVP (though you wouldn't have been able to guess from the way I played; I actually got scolded for "not being selfish enough with the ball" on a few occasions).

[Armitage]

But I don't have any legitimate reason to go to those stores—and I don't think I'll ever reach a point of desperation at which I'm willing to make unnecessary trip to a store, fake helplessness, and then buy something I don't need just for the mere chance of meeting a dual. Even if a worker at a store did think I was cute or something, him ringing up my unnecessary purchase would likely be the end of it unless he was bold enough to ask me out after one interaction or I kept coming & buying useless stuff repeatedly.

You can always take on an in-person programming course instead. That way you'll meet new people who are mostly thinkers, see them recurringly, and you'll pick up a horizon expanding skill that will improve your life. It's like learning a new language, hence the term programming language. Or you might simply ask your nearest manager out, because he probably is a LSE too, but where's the fun in that?

[Dreymagine]

You can always take on an in-person programming course instead. That way you'll meet new people who are mostly thinkers, see them recurringly, and you'll pick up a horizon expanding skill that will improve your life. It's like learning a new language, hence the term programming language.

Haha, maybe I'll give such a course a go if I'm crazy bored during the summer and in the mood to go dual-seeking.

Or you might simply ask your nearest manager out, because he probably is a LSE too, but where's the fun in that?

Lol, yeah, there really is no fun in asking out a manager who's obese and twice your age

Hmm, this has me thinking about what his type is tho. I don't think LSE... He seems more chill and lax than how people have been describing my dual. By vibe, I'd say he's SEI.

[Dreymagine]

This does seem like good advice for identifying LSEs because there's only two people I know IRL who I suspect of being LSEs, and they're the only people I've met who I would consider no-nonsense.

One was a teacher at my high school—an extremely multi-talented one, who taught Spanish, Latin, Old Testament, calculus, and physics. I think we dualized; she thought I was the best student ever and I thought she was the best teacher ever.

The other is a girl I played basketball with and now work with. I didn't dualize with her; I typically get along with everyone, but our personalities clash. She's very critical of me (and in a way that is not even remotely constructive).

I can't think of any guys I've met who seem like LSEs, though. I wonder if they're rare or something.

Oh, I was able to think of one more person who seemed like a no-nonsense LSE. She was the extremely strict mother of one of my closest high-school friends. I thought she disliked me, but my perception may have been wrong because my friend reported her talking about how I was an "amazing friend" and a "positive influence." She even hired me to work for her, basically as a personal assistant, for a couple summers.

We got along outwardly, but I was secretly so angry about how she treated my friend / her daughter. She forced her to stay home-schooled and micro-managed her life. She would be bitterly and vocally disappointed whenever my friend didn't manage to meet her high standards of performance in academics and athletics. She openly compared us (in regard to race times, ACT scores, anything), and whenever I came out on top in some way, she was angry at her daughter for not surpassing me. I think she was secretly angry at me, as well, because for some reason she'd decided to pit her daughter and me against each other in her mind... Pretty unhealthy, the whole thing. It put a serious strain on our friendship during several XC and track seasons because we were already competitive with one another and her mother's comparisons exacerbated the situation.

Either LSEs have a surprisingly strong track record of getting on my nerves (2 for 3 is admittedly not a great sample size, though) or I've been mistyping a couple Beta STs as my dual.

Super late EDIT bc I don't wanna triple post:

Okay, last one because this isn't even related to the thread's topic (dating) at this point oof but wanted to talk about it to the void.

I thought of one last no-nonsense person I know who is potentially LSE: a former college friend of mine. We've been gradually drifting away for a while, not seeing each other for long periods of time since she tends to self-isolate. But whenever we do see each other, she says odd stuff like "being alone is underrated; I don't feel lonely. And I hate everyone on campus except you. I like you because you're you." And I like her because she's her as well. So maybe we're dualizing.. albeit in some weird way that has her not particularly wanting to spend time with me?

So I guess I may know 4 LSEs, all females. 2 I get along with and 2 might actually be Beta STs.

[Minde]

You should talk to @Minde if you get the chance. She's dated several LSEs and she has some experience with them.

Known, not dated. I think I've properly dated exactly one LSE.

I guess what I was saying is not that I want all guys to hit on me in droves lol but that I wish at least one quality dude would like me.

I can relate to this. It's astonishingly hard to find someone who's quality, generally gets along with you, wants you, and is available.

@Dreymagine, I think that Adam means that they're more clueless in the sense of recognizing when someone actually likes them. Even if love would be right in front of their noses, they wouldn't recognize it. That doesn't mean, however, that they don't cherish it, as a Te-user myself, I know we feel deeply. It's just hard for us to recognize if someone loves us, because we don't particularly love ourselves. That's the consequence of one dimensional Fi, we feel that we have to prove that we are lovable by being successfull. ( Don't ask, though, for the success rate of this strategy, but it's a very Te-way of approaching Fi-problems. )

Yes, the Te ego people I know tend to need to be told very directly that you love them, care about them, and are planning on sticking around. They still might take awhile to believe it. In part this is because they're used to people leaving them, usually taking them by surprise.

Just go for the no-nonsense guy who is always on time or five minutes early at every activity, chances are that he's an LSE or SLI.

In my experience, ESXjs can also be on the late side. The two LSEs I'm closest to are habitually late. Except when they're not. Uncertainty around time management can be an indicator though, yes.

Go to a hardware store or a Home Depot or a Lowes and look helpless. Ask for help from the big guy who is stolid and square-looking. He'll most likely be an LSE. SLIs hang out there, too, but they are more slender and bouncy and less ponderous.

Again, I must be contrary. Both the LSEs I'm closest to are on the thinner side.

It's possible there's a swath of LSEs that I just haven't recognized, though.

But I don't have any legitimate reason to go to those stores—and I don't think I'll ever reach a point of desperation at which I'm willing to make unnecessary trip to a store, fake helplessness, and then buy something I don't need just for the mere chance of meeting a dual. Even if a worker at a store did think I was cute or something, him ringing up my unnecessary purchase would likely be the end of it unless he was bold enough to ask me out after one interaction or I kept coming & buying useless stuff repeatedly.

That would be very weird, you're right.

Before I got married and didn't have to think about it anymore, I had a similar conundrum. LSEs seem to all be interested in the opposite sorts of things I am. Our daily habits and energies are different, too. I decided to be sort of purposeful in expanding my interests a little. In part to try to encounter more LSEs, yes, but I didn't want to be motivated by just that (like you, there's an integrity and self-respect aspect) so I made sure that they were activities I could actually enjoy or at least benefit from by themselves.

Taking classes is one idea, yes, but the LSEs probably are already proficient in whatever subject it is, so they would likely either be a lot younger or already graduated. But classes can be a stepping stone, and I think often there are group activities that include both advanced people and beginners that can be a good way to both practice new skills and meet new people. I met my now husband hiking, which isn't my absolute favorite thing but does incorporate things I like (nature, pretty views) and things I think I should do (be in shape, have some (very) basic survival skills). He is a fairly advanced hiker, but it so happened that he needed the "easy" hike I was organizing and so he joined. There's more to that story, haha, but the main point of this part is I expanded my activities circle just enough that it did overlap with a quality LSE.


Anyway, this is unsolicited advice, so feel free to dismiss it. I do relate to a lot of what you're expressing, though.

[Armitage]

@Dreymagine, the drifting college friend doesn't sound like a LSE to me, because the whole self-isolating would drain them severely of their energy. The days I I spend solely programming behind my computer I deem rather solitary. Despite that in any case I still have contact with my parents, text a bit with friends, and possibly get visited by my neighbours, or my favourite Aunt, Uncle, and Cousin may spontaneously come over. And every week I have a few voicecalls and videocalls with friends too, even when I do not physically meet up with people.

Still, I call weeks like these solitary, because I have seen few people in-person. I cannot imagine an LSE enjoying secluding themselves, unless they draw back from the college social circles, in order to socialize with other people instead. We need people like we need sleep, a bit less is endurable, but not nice, while none at all is killing.

[Armitage]

@mloolks, these days I generally look on dating applications for people who are interested.

[spacious]

Why is my LSI ex that i haven't talked to since 2019/2020 and we broke up in 2016 sending me a friend request on facebook - I didn't even know he had removed me as a friend, lol. He's done that a couple times before over the years, deleted me then requested me again. I think our last interaction he texted on a weekend night "Hey, wanna chat, shoot the shit sometime?" *a few seconds later, still him" "Though, I realize it is kinda late right now". I think the next day I was like haha no thanks but hope youre well, and he said yeah lots of changes but doing well, and I said cool.

years before that, he said he really missed my friendship, and hadnt made any new friends in the years since we'd broken up. it wasnt a very serious relationship (in my eyes now) but we were both inexperienced at the time.

I will just give it time to process, and probably eventually just accept the request and keep his updates hidden, like I used to do. He posts... very odd and bit disturbing song lyrics that he writes, and meme type content, and i remember I would not feel good after looking at his page.

Armitage thanks for the questions re my last post, I will reply once i'm ready (emotionally heavy topic but will get there).

[Adam Strange]

Why is my LSI ex that i haven't talked to since 2019/2020 and we broke up in 2016 sending me a friend request on facebook - I didn't even know he had removed me as a friend, lol. He's done that a couple times before over the years, deleted me then requested me again. I think our last interaction he texted on a weekend night "Hey, wanna chat, shoot the shit sometime?" *a few seconds later, still him" "Though, I realize it is kinda late right now". I think the next day I was like haha no thanks but hope youre well, and he said yeah lots of changes but doing well, and I said cool.

years before that, he said he really missed my friendship, and hadnt made any new friends in the years since we'd broken up. it wasnt a very serious relationship (in my eyes now) but we were both inexperienced at the time.

I will just give it time to process, and probably eventually just accept the request and keep his updates hidden, like I used to do. He posts... very odd and bit disturbing song lyrics that he writes, and meme type content, and i remember I would not feel good after looking at his page.

Armitage thanks for the questions re my last post, I will reply once i'm ready (emotionally heavy topic but will get there).

@wonderwoman, I dated an LSI for four years after my divorce, and I broke up with her four times. Just told her that we weren't meant for each other, cut contact, and a few months later, she'd contact me again. We got back together three times (because I like her most of the time, the sex was fantastic, and I'm weak), but the last breakup stuck because I made it stick. Even though she contacted me a couple times since then, too.

I know an LSI male who had some kind of mid-life crisis, divorced his wife, lost weight, bought a large boat, tried to date, and two years later remarried his ex-wife.

I think that LSIs need structure, and since they are kind of chicken-shit in romance (EJ Arendee's words), they have a hard time approaching a new target and tend to want to fix the old target.

When the behavior of any particular type puzzles you, realize that they are treating the world as if it was entirely composed of Duals. Who is the Dual of LSI's? EIEs. The most mercurial, shape-shifting, role-playing type in the socion. A type whose moods change like the weather.
A person who is built for EIEs is a person who is grounded, stable, persistent, and who doesn't give up just because someone says they want out or they became a different person.

YOU, wonderwoman, are being treated the way an LSI treats an EIE.

Just bear in mind, you're not fundamentally different from the person you were when you broke up with the LSI, and the LSI is exactly the same person you broke up with. So, upon contact, you can expect to slide right back into the exact same situation you were in when you left them.

[Armitage]

If this is the EIE-LSI dynamic, what's the ESI-LIE dynamic like from more of an outsider's perspective? After all, what feels natural to us oftentimes goes unnoticed. I think that this might also be why duals don't always notice each other at first.

[Adam Strange]

If this is the EIE-LSI dynamic, what's the ESI-LIE dynamic like from more of an outsider's perspective? After all, what feels natural to us oftentimes goes unnoticed. I think that this might also be why duals don't always notice each other at first.

@Armitage, from what I have gathered in my perusal of web statements, the "outside observer's" view of the LIE/ESI relationship is basically a rich John paying to be whipped by a woman in a Dominatrix outfit.

But don't take my word for it. Here's one description. Scroll down for ESI (ISFP)/LIE (ENTJ): https://typingispainintheass.tumblr....y-descriptions.

And here is a gold-digging ESI-Se talking about her Sugar Daddy: https://imgur.com/gallery/5RuSEjQ

OK, now that you've seen that, you can go forward into the future and try to retain your pride in all of your new romantic relationships. Lol.

In my own experience, there is an element of truth to these descriptioins, because ESIs have love (Fi) and LIEs have money (Te), and we all tend to give what we've got. It's not perfectly accurate as a description of the relationship, but it's definitely trending in that direction.

The ILI-SEE dual pair is said to be worse, though. More of an Ni-Se Victim-Aggressor thing.

*EDIT*
It's funny, but the relationship doesn't FEEL to me like it's an exchange of love for money, but when I back up, I see that I'm usually the one who pays for everything and the ESI is the one who is interested in being with me.

I dated an ESI-Fi last summer, and I ended up paying for everything. I don't think she paid for a single thing on any date, until the last one, when she bought two almond croissants; one for her and one for me.
I thought that was progress, but it wasn't as good as the ESI-Se Artist/Decorator, who quickly insisted on paying for her own lunches.

[spacious]

@Adam Strange, thanks, your response is helpful. Will give things a think and may pose some follow-up questions later. When folks come out of the woodwork like this, it makes one want to think about things / strategize on how to 'handle' the contact so that an undesired pattern doesn't continue to play out in the future.

Also, as a bit of a note to self - you posted something* about ESIs' independence which I'd like to read. Could help me understand myself better. I learn a lot from the knowledge you have about ESIs.

* a link to an article on how LIEs make themselves indispensable to ESIs

[Adam Strange]

@Adam Strange, thanks, your response is helpful. Will give things a think and may pose some follow-up questions later. When folks come out of the woodwork like this, it makes one want to think about things / strategize on how to 'handle' the contact so that an undesired pattern doesn't continue to play out in the future.

Also, as a bit of a note to self - you posted something* about ESIs' independence which I'd like to read. Could help me understand myself better. I learn a lot from the knowledge you have about ESIs.

* a link to an article on how LIEs make themselves indispensable to ESIs

@wonderwoman, please don't take everything I say at face value. Everything that I post is filtered thought my LIE function stack. For you, it might be like trying to run MAC OS on a Windows machine. Or vice-versa. I make a lot of assumptions which are not spelled out in my posts. So please approach these statements with caution.

Anyway, ESIs do seem to be self-sufficient to me. Maybe LIEs seem that way to ESIs, too, IDK. In any case, when meeting an ESI, I know that I very soon feel like this is a very valuable person to know, and I feel good just being around them.

This, of course, depends on them acting like themselves, and not acting in a way that is designed to attract me. Lol.

Those links are here, one for LIE and one for ESI:

Advice to Jack on how to be necessary to the self-sufficient Dreiser: https://socionic.ru/index.php/2010-1...chnogodraizera

Advice to Dreiser on How to Win Jack: https://socionic.ru/index.php/2010-1...10-05-20-51-48

It might help you to know that one of the things I look for in ESIs (because they have it) is a resting bitch face, or a tendency to not be all that nice or friendly at first. You don't have to try for this, though. That would probably overdo it. Just be yourself.

I think that the thing that surprised me most about ESIs is that they seem to relate to the world entirely through Fi. They decide who they like and don't like by Fi. That is very different from the way I approach the world, which is almost entirely through Te.