# I find any time there's a thread fighting anti-sensor stereotypes...



## Oprah (Feb 5, 2014)

[No message]


----------



## Grandmaster Yoda (Jan 18, 2014)

What do you mean? I noticed there was a thread trying to dispel myths about Si not being about memory recall etc. but it wasn't about positively speaking of Si, just dispelling myths and every argued about what Si really was thereafter.


----------



## Oprah (Feb 5, 2014)

Grandmaster Yoda said:


> What do you mean? I noticed there was a thread trying to dispel myths about Si not being about memory recall etc. but it wasn't about positively speaking of Si, just dispelling myths and every argued about what Si really was thereafter.


from what I saw it devolved into everyone arguing with each other until the thread got locked


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

Oprah said:


> there is a huge flame war and debate to follow.
> 
> What is so offensive about saying positive things about sensing types?



Nothing at all, in fact, sensors are more needed in society than intuitives. If there were too many intuitives and nothing practical would ever get done.


----------



## Cellar Door (Jun 3, 2012)

Oprah said:


> from what I saw it devolved into everyone arguing with each other until the thread got locked


So...it sounds like this happened one time? What other threads are you talking about?


----------



## TheProphetLaLa (Aug 18, 2014)

They hate us, cuz they ain't us. Thats right I said it. Boop.


----------



## Oprah (Feb 5, 2014)

tanstaafl28 said:


> Nothing at all, in fact, sensors are more needed in society than intuitives. If there were too many intuitives and nothing practical would ever get done.


this is a backhanded compliment 
sorry


----------



## PaladinX (Feb 20, 2013)

Oprah said:


> this is a backhanded compliment
> sorry





Oprah said:


> What is so offensive about saying positive things about sensing types?


----------



## Deus Absconditus (Feb 27, 2011)

tanstaafl28 said:


> Nothing at all, in fact, sensors are more needed in society than intuitives. If there were too many intuitives and nothing practical would ever get done.


I hate this notion. Nobody is more important to society than another, its the combination of all humans that help progress society and humanity. Sensors arent more needed than intuitives, we are both equally needed. Everybody always wants to say some types are needed more than anothers, as if all types havent made a huge impact in our history leading up to present moment.

The truth of the matter is that everyone has their strengths, its how we apply these strengths in unison together that makes society such a strong structure. It may, unfortunately, also be the cause of many problems when we apply our strengths in manners that they arent efficient and/or effective in. Nevertheless, all personality types have something equal of value to offer society, and humanity as a whole.


----------



## Oprah (Feb 5, 2014)

PaladinX said:


>


Saying _"If there were too many intuitives, nothing would get done!"_ implies that Sensors are only mindless robots who do what they're told and follow out mundane tasks that _"are needed for society to run!"_



It also implies that intuitives don't have time for such tasks... as if they have _'more important'_ things to do other than the mundane tasks that the _'collective sensor sheep'_ carry out.


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

Shadow Logic said:


> I hate this notion. Nobody is more important to society than another, its the combination of all humans that help progress society and humanity. Sensors arent more needed than intuitives, we are both equally needed. Everybody always wants to say some types are needed more than anothers, as if all types havent made a huge impact in our history leading up to present moment.
> 
> The truth of the matter is that everyone has their strengths, its how we apply these strengths in unison together that makes society such a strong structure. It may, unfortunately, also be the cause of many problems when we apply our strengths in manners that they arent efficient and/or effective in. Nevertheless, all personality types have something equal of value to offer society, and humanity as a whole.


:tongue: Gotcha!


----------



## Oprah (Feb 5, 2014)

Cellar Door said:


> So...it sounds like this happened one time? What other threads are you talking about?


because I'm replying to the specific example means that there is only that one example?



what?


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

Cellar Door said:


> So...it sounds like this happened one time? What other threads are you talking about?


This debate springs up ever now and then. It's senseless...oh I didn't mean to make a pun.


----------



## Oprah (Feb 5, 2014)

tanstaafl28 said:


> :tongue: Gotcha!


And what were these antics supposed to prove?
I'm trying to decipher your intent, but I can't land on an underlying point.


----------



## Oprah (Feb 5, 2014)

tanstaafl28 said:


> This debate springs up ever now and then. It's senseless...oh I didn't mean to make a pun.


your actions right now directly contradict the statement.
Congratulations.


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

Oprah said:


> And what were these antics supposed to prove?
> I'm trying to decipher your intent, but I can't land on an underlying point.


I'm being silly. It is better than taking this sort of thing too seriously.


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

Oprah said:


> your actions right now directly contradict the statement.
> Congratulations.


Why thank you!


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Oh God, this UglierBetty poster again, wanting us to give gold stars to sensors. Just cuz.


----------



## Cellar Door (Jun 3, 2012)

tanstaafl28 said:


> This debate springs up ever now and then. It's senseless...oh I didn't mean to make a pun.


Yeah, and usually by the noobs. 

I'd also like to point out how ironic this thread is, a thread about arguments breaking out due to an anti-sensor sentiment that's slowly turning into exactly that.


----------



## Oprah (Feb 5, 2014)

FearAndTrembling said:


> Oh God, this UglierBetty poster again, wanting us to give gold stars to sensors. Just cuz.


um...


----------



## Oprah (Feb 5, 2014)

Cellar Door said:


> Yeah, and usually by the noobs.
> 
> I'd also like to point out how ironic this thread is, a thread about arguments breaking out due to an anti-sensor sentiment that's slowly turning into exactly that.



yet we've already had the classic comments about how

_"Sensors are useful for things iNtuitives just don't have time for"_
_"Not all types are equal. Sensors shouldn't get gold stars just 'cause"_




I'm sorry if not being elitist and narcissistic makes me a noob... but then I'd rather be a noob <3


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

Cellar Door said:


> Yeah, and usually by the noobs.
> 
> I'd also like to point out how ironic this thread is, a thread about arguments breaking out due to an anti-sensor sentiment that's slowly turning into exactly that.


I love irony. I'm married to a sensor. I admire them greatly. We have learned to work through our differences and it actually makes us a very complimentary team.


----------



## Oprah (Feb 5, 2014)

tanstaafl28 said:


> I love irony. I'm married to a sensor. I admire them greatly. We have learned to work through our differences and it actually makes us a very complimentary team.


idk I expected this exact thing to happen and it has


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Oprah said:


> idk I expected this exact thing to happen and it has


Well, it is a continuation of your aggressive accusations and insistence on being a victim. You will accept no other plight. I looked through the thread that got locked. You are throwing around accusations at Reckful, and others. Same thing here. Same tune every time.


----------



## Oprah (Feb 5, 2014)

FearAndTrembling said:


> Well, it is a continuation of your aggressive accusations and insistence on being a victim. You will accept no other plight. I looked through the thread that got locked. You are throwing around accusations at Reckful, and others. Same thing here. Same tune every time.


you're the one who said that _"We shouldn't give sensors gold stars just 'cause"_ ...which implies
(a) They are beneath you in a position for you to be able to give them gold stars
(b) They need gold stars for validation
(c) That you believe they ARE inferior to you and need to "just accept it"


tons of more, but I don't want to waste time enumerating the implications of your despicable post. 





but yea, it's totally my fault.


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

Oprah said:


> idk I expected this exact thing to happen and it has



And yet you still did it anyway.


----------



## Oprah (Feb 5, 2014)

tanstaafl28 said:


> And yet you still did it anyway.


Well it illustrates my point quite well, doesn't it?


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Oprah said:


> you're the one who said that _"We shouldn't give sensors gold stars just 'cause"_ ...which implies
> (a) They are beneath you in a position for you to be able to give them gold stars
> (b) They need gold stars for validation
> (c) That you believe they ARE inferior to you and need to "just accept it"
> ...


Yes, revert to being a victim. It is your shell. Pop your head back in. You will twist anybody's words to fit your agenda, and make them the bad guy. You are a main reason the last thread was closed, and then make another.


----------



## Oprah (Feb 5, 2014)

FearAndTrembling said:


> Yes, revert to being a victim. It is your shell. Pop your head back in. You will twist anybody's words to fit your agenda, and make them the bad guy. You are a main reason the last thread was closed, and then make another.


Own up to your words, please. 

Stop shifting the blame onto the person who noticed the problem.


----------



## RunForCover07 (Apr 9, 2013)

Oprah said:


> Own up to your words, please.
> 
> Stop shifting the blame onto the person who noticed the problem.


And you think you're the one that's going to solve the bias on these forums. That's adorable.


----------



## Dastan (Sep 28, 2011)

So you want sensors to be offended to be the one who gets offended for saying that they're offended?


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

Why does this sound so familiar?


----------



## Cellar Door (Jun 3, 2012)

Oprah said:


> because I'm replying to the specific example means that there is only that one example?
> 
> 
> 
> what?


When you're inferring there's a sentiment you need more than one example. I honestly feel like I hear more about anti-sensor sentiment than I see anti-sensor sentiment.


----------



## Cellar Door (Jun 3, 2012)

Oprah said:


> yet we've already had the classic comments about how
> 
> _"Sensors are useful for things iNtuitives just don't have time for"_
> _"Not all types are equal. Sensors shouldn't get gold stars just 'cause"_
> ...


I'm not saying at at all, I was saying that sensor vs. intuitive debate threads that bash sensors are for noobs.


----------



## surgery (Apr 16, 2010)

Oprah said:


> yet we've already had the classic comments about how
> 
> _"Sensors are useful for things iNtuitives just don't have time for"_
> _"Not all types are equal. Sensors shouldn't get gold stars just 'cause"_
> ...


First of all, where does he say Intuitives don't think they get things done because they don't _want to_ spend their time doing it? That's just your interpretation, but it doesn't actually have to mean that. Maybe some Intuitives have goals that they'd like to carry out, but find themselves inefficient because they are easily distracted by their Intuitions (or Feeling judgments or whatever). Maybe they consider it a weakness (but who's to say whether it actually is or not?) Also, the person who originally wrote that comment about "giving gold stars" probably wouldn't give Intuitives gold stars just because they're Intuitive. So, where's the bias?

I think you're intentionally twisting peoples words in order to justify unnecessary meanness and aggression. 

I understand you perceive that there's an anti-sensor bias on this forum. I sympathize because sometimes I feel there is a strong anti-Fi bias on many threads here and there, but i don't understand how you can say you're trying not to be elitist but you didn't even bother to respond to this comment:



TheProphetLaLa said:


> They hate us, cuz they ain't us. Thats right I said it. Boop.


This comment was made by someone who identifies as a Sensor. How come you didn't bother to point our the false and negative implications here? Why does this person get a free pass to be typist? In my opinion, it blatantly has anti-Intuitive sentiments like it suggests that all Intuitives hate themselves for not being Sensors. It suggests that we're hateful of other people for their differences. That's very typist. 

I looked over the thread about Si that got locked. I also looked over some of the things that have been said about Sensors in this forum and I don't perceive an anti-Sensor bias. Rather, I just see you wanting to look for something to be angry about. In that thread, for example, it was mentioned that the only time a certain user on the forum ever said anything good about SJs was when he was saying that they're good at following producers. Another user commented that wasn't actually a good think--that following producers has negative implications in our culture. But, who is to say that's true. What about in the military, in a bank, on a farm, in schools---following procedures is particularly beneficial in those circumstances and many more. So, why do you insist that's typist, especially because he wasn't saying that SJs can't perform other jobs?

P.S. Your username and pic are racist and sexist and not to mention just personally mean. They make it seems like that particular African American woman is just a product to be plucked meant for your amusement. Her success and good-will in the face of adversity mean anything to you? What about all the people whom she actually helped by allowing them to have a platform to speak about their experiences? Why is it okay for you to steal her identity and image without her knowing so you can flame people on the internet? Black women don't work hard everyday for you to hide behind their faces.


----------



## TheProphetLaLa (Aug 18, 2014)

surgery said:


> First of all, where does he say Intuitives don't think they get things done because they don't _want to_ spend their time doing it? That's just your interpretation, but it doesn't actually have to mean that. Maybe some Intuitives have goals that they'd like to carry out, but find themselves inefficient because they are easily distracted by their Intuitions (or Feeling judgments or whatever). Maybe they consider it a weakness (but who's to say whether it actually is or not?) Also, the person who originally wrote that comment about "giving gold stars" probably wouldn't give Intuitives gold stars just because they're Intuitive. So, where's the bias?
> 
> I think you're intentionally twisting peoples words in order to justify unnecessary meanness and aggression.
> 
> ...


 I was being ironic. Clearly that went right over your head. Have a nice day.


----------



## Oprah (Feb 5, 2014)

surgery said:


> P.S. Your profile name and user picture are racist and sexist and not to mention just personally mean. They make it seems like that particular African American woman is a joke meant for your amusement. Her success and good-will is nothing but a joke to you, is that it? Why is it okay to steal her identity and image without her knowing so you can flame people on the internet.


is this your attempt to use my own logic process against me in order to "show me what is feels like"?


----------



## surgery (Apr 16, 2010)

TheProphetLaLa said:


> I was being ironic. Clearly that went right over your head. Have a nice day.



No, I wasn't offended by your comment and I saw your intentions. I just want to show Oprah that he's being a hypocrite, by not attacking your the same way he unreasonably attacks others.


----------



## Oprah (Feb 5, 2014)

surgery said:


> No, I wasn't offended by your comment and I saw your intentions. I just want to show Oprah that he's being a hypocrite, by not attacking your the same way he unreasonably attacks others.


or I was smart enough to realize the intent of the post?


----------



## surgery (Apr 16, 2010)

Oprah said:


> is this your attempt to use my own logic process against me in order to "show me what is feels like"?



Yes. You are twisting people's intentions and exaggerating their comments to assume the worst so that you can attack them. You may or may not feel that what you're doing is racist or sexist, but it certainly can be interpreted that way. Similarly, perhaps even worse, you choose to assume the worst possible implications from what users are saying (or you simply twist what they said into something they did not). Please stop this behavior.


----------

