Is there chemistry in supervision relations?

[Bertrand]

my point is its silly to identify power with abuse. couldn't you just as easily say if all supervisors married their supervisees there'd be less abuse in the world, because they're more likely to use the power benevolently than they otherwise would, thus offsetting abuse that way? its like you frame supervisory relations as inherently adversarial and only see them being balanced by a similarly ugly power imbalance, when they're not even necessarily not benevolent and hence not abusive to begin with. further it implicates judgements as flowing from the power imbalance and not from actual judgement, and further gives no room for actual judgements in offsetting them. it totally ignores how socionics actually works just to play up a stereotype of one ITR

[bolong]

my point is its silly to identify power with abuse. couldn't you just as easily say if all supervisors married their supervisees there'd be less abuse in the world, because they're more likely to use the power benevolently than they otherwise would, thus offsetting abuse that way? its like you frame supervisory relations as inherently adversarial and only see them being balanced by a similarly ugly power imbalance, when they're not even necessarily not benevolent and hence not abusive to begin with. further it implicates judgements as flowing from the power imbalance and not from actual judgement, and further gives no room for actual judgements in offsetting them. it totally ignores how socionics actually works just to play up a stereotype of one ITR

No, if a supervisor who also had more power according to the standards of society (albeit artificially constructed) there would be more abuses. It's only when people who would otherwise be marginalized are the supervisors, that things balance out a little

[Bertrand]

thanks for that dose of twisted ideology. so I guess my question is how do you deal with your supervisee? do you handicap yourself so as not to abuse them

[Alomoes]

I have found a case where this can happen. It is a trick. If you, have a beneficiary, that beneficiary is your supervisee's dual. As such, you can mediate between them. If this occurs, then you will be in the supervisee's debt.

In my case, it proved his skills were valuable. Now, any time I need that set of skills, I will call upon him. It is questionable whether he will respond.

[Bertrand]

As such, you can mediate between them. If this occurs, then you will be in the supervisee's debt.

if you mediate between two duals wouldn't that place them both in your debt? perhaps this is what you meant when you said

Now, any time I need that set of skills, I will call upon him. It is questionable whether he will respond.

I mean by your own admission the whole thing is a power play so if I were the duo I wouldn't sweat any sort of lack of repayment for such "benevolence." if anything you played yourself: helped some people expecting repayment but it was that expectation contemplated at the onset that makes it okay to ignore repaying you, unless you were up front about it. its possible you did a truly good deed unintentionally (a benevolent act without hope of repayment). good job

[Tigerfadder]

Interesting. Do you think being in that position of power would be attractive enough to keep someone in a toxic relationship? Depends on type, maybe?

Ya probably. There are all kinds of people and attractions. Depends on person, myself would not want that kind of relations around me.

[Nyam]

can you talk more about this? is this from personal experience?

[Nyam]

In intertype relation and based of personal experience, do you think Supervisee are attracted to the Supervisor or do they only want to stay away from them?

[Nyam]

why is it erotically disappointing?

[Nyam]

why can it become addictive