[Grim]

Wow, that sucks! To find out you've lost both your wife and best friend at the same time. Just when you're looking forward to some domestic bliss now that you're back. I can understand how lonely your ex could have felt, but she doesn't know what commitment is. You're better off without her, Grim. Every marriage has its rough patches, maybe it's better to find out earlier than later what she's made of *hugs*

I agree with what you've said here... my daughter is the biggest sufferer in all this. I'm sad it took place but I know I'm better for it in the long run.



I still have the friend, I forgave them both--the whole thing had cost too much already. Granted what I trust my friend with now has changed out of necessity... but I don't hate either of them. Anyway... enough derailment; my personal life was not the point of this thread.

[Perseus]

I have been a complete failure at the Romance game. When a small error get you beaten up by a Guard (SJ), I tend to be desirous, but I get burnt out by the risk factor. I have been in the Lions den with the Big Cats (ESTP). They accused me of being a Christian and threw me out.

[PersonaNonGrata]

my most important gf was a INFJ, 3 years of my relatively short life of 20 years ;) another one was SF, yes. actually i am very creative in doing things for them, but the classic aren't my taste, but i want them to feel happy, so i do very romantic things, but not because i need to, but because i like to make them happy. my concept of romance is a bit different, more like the comics i posted. when i make a present it is very very unique (loved childrens book she lost, or just some special candy on a normal day, just to prove i spent time thinking about it)

[Grish]

It's funny, cuz to me, I could honestly even consider just the fact that I don't hate someone enough to actually want to be around you at all as a "romantic" gesture.

Which kinda sucks because I doubt anyone else ever looks at it like that....but there is a lot of truth there.

Hey, that sounds like me. :D

[LeelooDallas]

See this is the kind of topic I need to print out for my INFP boyfriend since he's just not understanding what romance is to me. I'd say pretty much all of the traditional romantic things that guys are expected to do for women don't impress me :
- flowers - they eventually die and until then you have to keep cutting the stalks to help them last longer. that's way to much work for a gift that's only going to last a week.
- chocolates -OK chocolates taste good but to me it's an item of food and i don't quite get how its supposed to be more romantic receiving a box of chocolates than say a bag of grapes or a bucket of chicken.
- jewelry - over the years I've accumulated several pieces of jewelry that were gifts from old boyfriends. I don't wear much jewelry besides earrings, yet I have received many bracelets and necklaces .

Romance should be catered to the person you are with and not just some cliche gesture. For instance recently my current boyfriend surprised me with a off the beaten path tour of Chinatown and Lower East Side. The combination of learning new things, having a great discussion and delicious dim sum was very romantic to me.

[snail]

I'm not an NT, but I totally agree that in order to be truly romantic, it has to be directed at an individual rather than being an expression of an empty tradition. Most romantic traditions aim to please a stereotype of what "all men" or "all women" or are supposedly into, (usually "all women" because men are traditionally expected to be on the giving end) and fail to interest those who fall outside of the stereotype. I'm not into jewelry, chocolates or roses either. Poetry, music, art, or anything that shows he understands and cares who I am will always be more effective, especially if I can tell he put a lot of thought into it. The first time I ever had a boyfriend during Valentine's day, I gave him some first-edition books signed by an author I knew he liked. I had to look through all of the bookstores in three different towns to find them. I was secretly disappointed that he gave me a boring bouquet of ordinary, meaningless roses. Anyone can do that for anyone else, without it mattering who either of them is. It wasn't something for me. It was something for "a girlfriend."

Don't get me wrong. I'm glad he thought about me. I wasn't upset with him at all... just with the social expectations that led to the behavior. The very idea of celebrating Valentine's Day takes some of the romance out of doing nice things for each other, because it becomes an obligation. Instead of treating gift-giving as something meaningful, spontaneous and special that shows an authentic interest, it is just something we are expected to do to keep from seeming like we don't care, and ends up being neutral if we are successful in remembering "oh yeah, I'm supposed to buy something for my mate. Now let's see... which of the traditional gifts will it be this time?"

Partners can easily fall into the same kind of mentality on non-holidays. They will have good intentions, and will think "I love this person and want to do something special for her" but the next thought, instead of considering the partner as an individual, will still be " Now let's see... which of the traditional gifts will it be this time?" as though the same expectations always applied. I see it as a lack of creativity more than a lack of interest.

[decided]

Romance should be catered to the person you are with and not just some cliche gesture.

Couldn't have said it better!

[Irulan]

...i think if you want to understand the rationals concept of romance look at this :
xkcd - A Webcomic - Alone
xkcd - A Webcomic - Projection

I actually think those are really sweet.

I think I have some sort of strange natural attraction to NTs (introverted ones) or something.

On a different note, I'm not sure that the whole chocolate/flowers/whatever has to do with type. I find those to be a bit cheesy as well, personally. It's cute if my husband buys me flowers, but I have always appreciated his time more. Intellectual conversations are nice time together as long as it's in an area I can follow. (I can follow most easily, but some bore me to the zoning out point.) I do enjoy slow walks in quiet places though, which is probably more NFish. I think I read in the "love types" of INTPs (I think it was INTPs) that they like museum dates. I LOVE MUSEUMS!!! Anyhow, the whole point is that I think our romance styles can vary a little from the norm for our types. Mine certainly does, and I doubt I'm the only one. Romance probably has some to do with MBTI, but with a lot of other factors as well. I only say this from personal experience though, so I admit to it being a bit subjective. Anyone else agree with my current subjectiveness?

[Charlie Chaotic]

Romance and intimacy is a key factor in dealing with relationships. With that, I don't consider it a relationship. Now that doesn't mean that you have to be kissing (ect) in the relationship. As long as there is the emotional form of love, it is a relationship. Then comes the intimacy.

Love is being able to feel sad when your gone from each other for a week (or less), when you find yourself thinking about that person all the time, and it's when you start to doubt that your good enough for that person. That is how you know your in love. As long as you have that ping in your heart when you see your loved one's face, or you know that you'll do anything for that person, then that is love.

Gah...I'm an inner romantic but I can live without it. Romance is just showing you love someone, through words or even actions, or those feelings that you get. As simple as that.

And for the whole NF and NT thing, I think the concept of romance is mostly the same. I think the main difference is that NFs are much more:


And NT's are more like:

[Irulan]

haha

Yeah, Charlie, I agree with your distinction between NTs and NFs. haha