# How Personality Determines Dominant or Submissive Energy, and its Relation to Sexes



## Sparky

Jewish mythology mentions how Lilith was chosen as Adam's first wife, and rejected Adam, because she does not want to be submissive. Before, I understand this in a more physical context, though after learning about how everything is energy, this might be viewed in terms of energy exchange. It is possible that dominant and submissive energy fields are present in all organisms, and transcend the sex domains of male or female. The dominance or submissiveness of this energy field is associated with personality types, and below is a presentation of personality types (grouped by cognitive function usage), and their rank order in the dominance spectrum:

Most dominant or least submissive energy fields
1. ENTP, INTP, ESFJ, ISFJ (Ne, Ti, Fe, Si) - Most dominant 

2. INTJ, ENTJ, ISFP, ESFP (Ni, Te, Fi, Se) - Second most dominant

3. INFJ, ENFJ, ISTP, ESTP (Ni, Fe, Ti, Se) - Third most dominant

4. ENFP, INFP, ESTJ, ISTJ (Ne, Fi, Te, Si) - Least dominant
Least dominant or most submissive energy fields

Viewing the Biblical story about Lilith and Adam in this context, it is possible, for example, that Lilith is ENTP, who rejected Adam after refusing to submit, and instead, Adam married Eve, who happens to be ENFP. This dominant or submissive energy might be a precursor to the appearance of sexes. It determines the method of exchange involving energy and information transfer. The concept is very speculative, though the idea does shed light on the presence of dominant or submissive energies in people, according to their personality types. 

The energy described has to do with sexual attraction, in finding suitable mates, and not how someone organizes his environment. The dominant or submissive aspect has to do with how the first living organisms are not differentiated by male or female, therefore, dominant or submissive energy fields play a role in information or energy exchange. This thread is based on the same thread in the Philosophy or Critical Thinking forum, which is suggested to be discussed in the Cognitive Functions forum as well. Thank you.

Based on this thread:
On the Subject of Dominant or Submissive Energy, Personality Types, and the Sexes


----------



## RedTree

Can you be more specific in defining what you mean by dominant and submissive energy? For instance, do you mean dominant in terms of being more active in finding a romantic partner, or in taking control in an already established relationship?

And are you saying this with the premise that most romantic relationships have one person who has dominant energy and one with submissive energy? Or that some dominant people like other dominant people and vice versa?


----------



## Sparky

RedTree said:


> Can you be more specific in defining what you mean by dominant and submissive energy? For instance, do you mean dominant in terms of being more active in finding a romantic partner, or in taking control in an already established relationship?
> 
> And are you saying this with the premise that most romantic relationships have one person who has dominant energy and one with submissive energy? Or that some dominant people like other dominant people and vice versa?


Dominant or submissive energy is associated with more of the mental aspect in human relationships and sexuality. It is a better match if a couple includes one having dominant energy, and another with submissive energy, like a marker and its cap.


----------



## k1123

As an ESFJ with a strong feminine essence, I can't understand ESFJ listed as having stronger dominant energy than ENTJ and ESTJ. Anyway, you may be interested in the work of David Deida, specifically his writings about the masculine essence and the feminine essence. Perhaps both Adam and Lilith had a masculine essence, and Eve had a feminine essence.


----------



## Sparky

k1123 said:


> As an ESFJ with a strong feminine essence, I can't understand ESFJ listed as having stronger dominant energy than ENTJ and ESTJ. Anyway, you may be interested in the work of David Deida, specifically his writings about the masculine essence and the feminine essence. Perhaps both Adam and Lilith had a masculine essence, and Eve had a feminine essence.


Energy does not differentiate between masculinity or femininity, because it does not deal with male or female, only dominant or submissive. Your definition of "strong feminine essence" might mean "high dominant energy as a woman," in this example.


----------



## k1123

The terms are from David Deida. Feminine essence is about being more comfortable in the submissive role. I'm into serving people, not controlling them. Now if we're talking about the environment around me, yeah, I'm comfortable controlling that. Btw women can have a masculine essence, and men can have a feminine essence. I hope you do check out his work -- it nicely explains why Adam and Lilith were incompatible.


----------



## Vermillion

Sparky said:


> Jewish mythology mentions how Lilith was chosen as Adam's first wife, and rejected Adam, because she does not want to be submissive. Before, I understand this in a more physical context, though after learning about how everything is energy, this might be viewed in terms of energy exchange. It is possible that dominant and submissive energy fields are present in all organisms, and transcend the sex domains of male or female. The dominance or submissiveness of this energy field is associated with personality types, and below is a presentation of personality types (grouped by cognitive function usage), and their rank order in the dominance spectrum:


What energy fields and how is it related to personality type? There are several different schools of thought that work on energy fields and attach different meanings to them, so it's new to me to see one that correlates them with MBTI type. You can say that they're present because you believe in their presence, but whether or not you're right and whether or not I want to agree with you, I need to see what sources you have to establish the connection you've made below.

Yes, dominance and submissiveness as personality traits don't have to do anything with being male or female inasmuch as they are societal gender roles assigned to males and females. I mean, what then are you going to call people who are nonbinary? Being nonbinary doesn't mean you have completely neutral personality traits, so that wouldn't apply here either. 



> Most dominant or least submissive energy fields
> 1. ENTP, INTP, ESFJ, ISFJ (Ne, Ti, Fe, Si) - Most dominant
> 
> 2. INTJ, ENTJ, ISFP, ESFP (Ni, Te, Fi, Se) - Second most dominant
> 
> 3. INFJ, ENFJ, ISTP, ESTP (Ni, Fe, Ti, Se) - Third most dominant
> 
> 4. ENFP, INFP, ESTJ, ISTJ (Ne, Fi, Te, Si) - Least dominant
> Least dominant or most submissive energy fields


Again, why? What are you basing this on? If you read Socionics you'll see how Se-valuing types are often portrayed as more powerful and likelier to want to be "dominant", for instance. So I don't see how you can say Ne-Si and Ti-Fe can lend itself to more dominant energy fields? Moreover, what sort of energy?

Anyway, if energy fields exist then I think they'd be more unique to the person and their mood rather than being determined by personality type, which is only a framework to put down how we think, and not dictate what we are.




> This dominant or submissive energy might be a precursor to the appearance of sexes. It determines the method of exchange involving energy and information transfer. The concept is very speculative, though the idea does shed light on the presence of dominant or submissive energies in people, according to their personality types.
> 
> The energy described has to do with sexual attraction, in finding suitable mates, and not how someone organizes his environment. The dominant or submissive aspect has to do with how the first living organisms are not differentiated by male or female, therefore, dominant or submissive energy fields play a role in information or energy exchange.


Transfer of information is more readily possible with people who share the same functions, and people who share the same functions but in different orders can be more dominant or submissive in certain aspects of their cognition, but that's about as far as it goes. I don't see how sexual attraction plays into this? Unless ok you're going to be more attracted to someone who can understand you. Otherwise, I wouldn't use type to determine if someone is dominating or submissive at all, no. That depends on the person. 

You do realize that not everyone necessarily even believes in Adam and Eve and Lilith, by the way? So creating a theory that automatically assumes their existence makes the theory pretty limited because it cannot apply across religions.

You are right in saying the concept is speculative. And that is all it will remain unless you shed some clarity on your theory and prove it.


----------



## All

I agree with what's been said here about gender roles. I don't believe for a second that dominant equates with male even when it's present in women, just that our society's roles have established men as dominant and women as submissive. It makes no sense to me to call being dominant "having male energy" or vice-versa, that's just nonsense. That's not to say that either of them is necessarily the wrong way to be, just that it annoys me when people try to make it relate to gender as though it's a default.

If anything, we could try to guess which types are more likely to adhere to convention, including gender roles.

In my opinion, being dominant or submissive in romantic or sexual relationships isn't related to type. It's just about individual personality and what people feel most comfortable doing. The MBTI is about how you gather information and process the world around you, two people who think similarly can have different roles in their relationships because of their individual preferences, their reasoning for it, the relationships themselves.


----------



## Sparky

Amaterasu said:


> What energy fields and how is it related to personality type? There are several different schools of thought that work on energy fields and attach different meanings to them, so it's new to me to see one that correlates them with MBTI type. You can say that they're present because you believe in their presence, but whether or not you're right and whether or not I want to agree with you, I need to see what sources you have to establish the connection you've made below.
> 
> Yes, dominance and submissiveness as personality traits don't have to do anything with being male or female inasmuch as they are societal gender roles assigned to males and females. I mean, what then are you going to call people who are nonbinary? Being nonbinary doesn't mean you have completely neutral personality traits, so that wouldn't apply here either.
> 
> 
> 
> Again, why? What are you basing this on? If you read Socionics you'll see how Se-valuing types are often portrayed as more powerful and likelier to want to be "dominant", for instance. So I don't see how you can say Ne-Si and Ti-Fe can lend itself to more dominant energy fields? Moreover, what sort of energy?
> 
> Anyway, if energy fields exist then I think they'd be more unique to the person and their mood rather than being determined by personality type, which is only a framework to put down how we think, and not dictate what we are.
> 
> 
> Transfer of information is more readily possible with people who share the same functions, and people who share the same functions but in different orders can be more dominant or submissive in certain aspects of their cognition, but that's about as far as it goes. I don't see how sexual attraction plays into this? Unless ok you're going to be more attracted to someone who can understand you. Otherwise, I wouldn't use type to determine if someone is dominating or submissive at all, no. That depends on the person.
> 
> You do realize that not everyone necessarily even believes in Adam and Eve and Lilith, by the way? So creating a theory that automatically assumes their existence makes the theory pretty limited because it cannot apply across religions.
> 
> You are right in saying the concept is speculative. And that is all it will remain unless you shed some clarity on your theory and prove it.


The energy discussed is specifically sexual energy. It is about how you fantasize when you are sexually aroused or masturbating. For example, an INFJ man fantasizing having sex with an ENFP woman will likely play the role of a man in the fantasy, dominating the bedroom. If the INFJ man is fantasizing sex with an ENTP girl, dominating becomes more awkward, and he might surrender to the role of a woman (becoming more submissive) in the fantasy, allowing his "partner" to call the shots.


----------



## Entropic

Sparky said:


> The energy discussed is specifically sexual energy. It is about how you fantasize when you are sexually aroused or masturbating. For example, an INFJ man fantasizing having sex with an ENFP woman will likely play the role of a man in the fantasy, dominating the bedroom. If the INFJ man is fantasizing sex with an ENTP girl, dominating becomes more awkward, and he might surrender to the role of a woman (becoming more submissive) in the fantasy, allowing his "partner" to call the shots.


Actually, this is what socionics writes about the Ne type when engaging in a relationship:

*Infantile*

(Redirected from Infantile group)
The *Infantile* types, identified as such by Viktor Gulenko, are the four types with  (Ne) in their ego, two each in Alpha and Delta: ILE (ENTP), LII (INTP), IEE (ENFP), and EII (INFP).
Despite the differences between these types in terms of temperament, base function, and quadra values, it seems that in the area of physical attraction, desire, and flirting, the ego element  (Ne), coupled with their expectations of  (Si) style behavior in intimate partners, is the most visible factor in determining "infantile'" behavior.


*Typical characteristics of the Infantile romance style*



interest is sparked in partner with positive aesthetic attributes *divorced from active, "aggressive" sexuality*
tend to try to attract partner's interest with joking, goofy or even "strange" behavior
try to help partner see the unexpected and fun side of things
*interest is maintained or cools off according to partner's response to this behavior*
appreciation for partner who actively cares about the individual's comfort and daily needs
neutral with regard to externally admitting who took the initiative in ending a relationship,* "power" is seen as unimportant in such matters*

This romance style is defined by focus on  (Ne) which is static, irrational, and extroverted, with perceptions focused on possibilities and alternatives to the static present reality, which the individual perceives as intrinsically boring and stagnant. This means that an Infantile sees attraction between two individuals as a static state, also from the point of view of the other person, which he tries to "get moving" by actively thinking of variations of the present static state. This accounts for an Infantile's inclination to focus on the mutual attraction, or particularly the attraction felt by the other person, as connected to that person's being exposed to the unexpected, imaginative, fun, even "weird" side of life, reality, and each other, *a behavior that can be described as "childlike".* *This focus leads to a sort of helplessness* regarding his own physical well being as perceived by  (Si), so he welcomes help from others in that area.
*Perception of other romance styles*

This refers to perceptions of the partner in a romantic or prospective relationship.

Aggressor: *Infantiles tend to perceive Aggressors as a bit too "rough" and even slightly scary on occasion, or perhaps just as obnoxious*
Victim: Infantiles tend to perceive Victims as paranoid and confusing, giving mixed signals.
Caregiver: Infantiles tend to perceive Caregivers as comforting and pleasant company, with a delightful sense of fun.
*Infantile*: Infantiles tend to perceive other Infantiles as fun to spend time with but also as helpless and demanding in a way that they see as stressful.

Compared to Se:

*Aggressor*
(Redirected from Aggressor group)
The *Aggressor* types, identified as such by Viktor Gulenko, are the four types with  (Se) in their ego, two each in Beta and Gamma: SLE (ESTP), LSI (ISTP), ESI (ISFP), and SEE (ESFP).
Despite the differences between these types in terms of temperament, base function, and quadra values, it seems that in the area of physical attraction, desire, flirting, and the like, in intimate relationships, the irrational ego element  (Se), coupled with their expectations of  (Ni) style behavior in intimate partners, is the most visible factor in an Aggressor's behavior.


*Typical characteristics of the Aggressor romance style*



no doubts about own interest in another person
not prone to hesitation about whether or not to reveal that interest
focus is more on own interest than whether or not the other person might reciprocate
*romantic interaction is more about "toughness" than "tenderness"*
*needs to feel some sense of "superiority" over the partner, but worthwhile only if the partner is seen as able to largely "keep up"*
*this takes the form of power games, which others might regard as cruel or bitchy*
in the case of female Aggressors with male partners, the above tends to assume the characteristic of a woman expecting total devotion from the partner, rather than her being "bossy"
little inclination to externally admit not having been the one to end a relationship, unless if adopting a "who cares" front simultaneously

This romance style is defined by focus on  (Se) which is static, irrational, and extroverted. This means that an Aggressor sees attraction to another person as a static state, which he feels it is up to him to change in the direction more in agreement to his preference.* This accounts for an Aggressor's inclination to take the initiative in approaching the object of his interest and being "relentless" in his pursuit,* as well as, even during an established relationship, continuing to try to "shake things up" or "get things moving". If his partner is not receptive to such behavior, this discourages the Aggressor, and results in his interest cooling off.

*Perception of other romance styles*
This refers to perceptions of the partner in a romantic or prospective relationship.
*Aggressor*: Aggressors tend to perceive other Aggressors as exciting partners worthy of admiration and respect, *but ultimately unsatisfactory due to a sense of never-ending competition for an ill-defined "upper hand", which becomes frustrating.*
Victim: Aggressors tend to perceive Victims simultaneously as pleasantly able to "keep up" regarding more "intensive" interactions, and also as not annoyingly prone to always wanting "to win". Aggressor women perceive Victim men as totally devoted yet reassuringly "strong".
Caregiver: Aggressors tend to perceive Caregivers as somewhat boring and patronizing.
Infantile: *Agressors tend to perceive Infantiles as too goofy and unexciting, ultimately not taking them seriously as partners.*


----------



## Sparky

ephemereality said:


> Actually, this is what socionics writes about the Ne type when engaging in a relationship:
> 
> *Infantile*
> 
> (Redirected from Infantile group)
> The *Infantile* types, identified as such by Viktor Gulenko, are the four types with  (Ne) in their ego, two each in Alpha and Delta: ILE (ENTP), LII (INTP), IEE (ENFP), and EII (INFP).
> Despite the differences between these types in terms of temperament, base function, and quadra values, it seems that in the area of physical attraction, desire, and flirting, the ego element  (Ne), coupled with their expectations of  (Si) style behavior in intimate partners, is the most visible factor in determining "infantile'" behavior.
> 
> 
> *Typical characteristics of the Infantile romance style*
> 
> 
> 
> interest is sparked in partner with positive aesthetic attributes *divorced from active, "aggressive" sexuality*
> tend to try to attract partner's interest with joking, goofy or even "strange" behavior
> try to help partner see the unexpected and fun side of things
> *interest is maintained or cools off according to partner's response to this behavior*
> appreciation for partner who actively cares about the individual's comfort and daily needs
> neutral with regard to externally admitting who took the initiative in ending a relationship,* "power" is seen as unimportant in such matters*
> 
> This romance style is defined by focus on  (Ne) which is static, irrational, and extroverted, with perceptions focused on possibilities and alternatives to the static present reality, which the individual perceives as intrinsically boring and stagnant. This means that an Infantile sees attraction between two individuals as a static state, also from the point of view of the other person, which he tries to "get moving" by actively thinking of variations of the present static state. This accounts for an Infantile's inclination to focus on the mutual attraction, or particularly the attraction felt by the other person, as connected to that person's being exposed to the unexpected, imaginative, fun, even "weird" side of life, reality, and each other, *a behavior that can be described as "childlike".* *This focus leads to a sort of helplessness* regarding his own physical well being as perceived by  (Si), so he welcomes help from others in that area.
> *Perception of other romance styles*
> 
> This refers to perceptions of the partner in a romantic or prospective relationship.
> 
> Aggressor: *Infantiles tend to perceive Aggressors as a bit too "rough" and even slightly scary on occasion, or perhaps just as obnoxious*
> Victim: Infantiles tend to perceive Victims as paranoid and confusing, giving mixed signals.
> Caregiver: Infantiles tend to perceive Caregivers as comforting and pleasant company, with a delightful sense of fun.
> *Infantile*: Infantiles tend to perceive other Infantiles as fun to spend time with but also as helpless and demanding in a way that they see as stressful.
> 
> Compared to Se:
> 
> *Aggressor*
> (Redirected from Aggressor group)
> The *Aggressor* types, identified as such by Viktor Gulenko, are the four types with  (Se) in their ego, two each in Beta and Gamma: SLE (ESTP), LSI (ISTP), ESI (ISFP), and SEE (ESFP).
> Despite the differences between these types in terms of temperament, base function, and quadra values, it seems that in the area of physical attraction, desire, flirting, and the like, in intimate relationships, the irrational ego element  (Se), coupled with their expectations of  (Ni) style behavior in intimate partners, is the most visible factor in an Aggressor's behavior.
> 
> 
> *Typical characteristics of the Aggressor romance style*
> 
> 
> 
> no doubts about own interest in another person
> not prone to hesitation about whether or not to reveal that interest
> focus is more on own interest than whether or not the other person might reciprocate
> *romantic interaction is more about "toughness" than "tenderness"*
> *needs to feel some sense of "superiority" over the partner, but worthwhile only if the partner is seen as able to largely "keep up"*
> *this takes the form of power games, which others might regard as cruel or bitchy*
> in the case of female Aggressors with male partners, the above tends to assume the characteristic of a woman expecting total devotion from the partner, rather than her being "bossy"
> little inclination to externally admit not having been the one to end a relationship, unless if adopting a "who cares" front simultaneously
> 
> This romance style is defined by focus on  (Se) which is static, irrational, and extroverted. This means that an Aggressor sees attraction to another person as a static state, which he feels it is up to him to change in the direction more in agreement to his preference.* This accounts for an Aggressor's inclination to take the initiative in approaching the object of his interest and being "relentless" in his pursuit,* as well as, even during an established relationship, continuing to try to "shake things up" or "get things moving". If his partner is not receptive to such behavior, this discourages the Aggressor, and results in his interest cooling off.
> 
> *Perception of other romance styles*
> This refers to perceptions of the partner in a romantic or prospective relationship.
> *Aggressor*: Aggressors tend to perceive other Aggressors as exciting partners worthy of admiration and respect, *but ultimately unsatisfactory due to a sense of never-ending competition for an ill-defined "upper hand", which becomes frustrating.*
> Victim: Aggressors tend to perceive Victims simultaneously as pleasantly able to "keep up" regarding more "intensive" interactions, and also as not annoyingly prone to always wanting "to win". Aggressor women perceive Victim men as totally devoted yet reassuringly "strong".
> Caregiver: Aggressors tend to perceive Caregivers as somewhat boring and patronizing.
> Infantile: *Agressors tend to perceive Infantiles as too goofy and unexciting, ultimately not taking them seriously as partners.*


I am assuming Romance styles relate to sexual fantasy, and because I am unfamiliar with Socionics, I cannot exactly comment on the information. The "Aggressor" is not specifically an "Se" type, because an INTJ man might be interested in bondage and discipline, or sadism and masochism (BDSM). Viktor Gulenko's ideas do relate to dominant-submissive spectrum in personality types, as posited in this thread.


----------



## Entropic

Sparky said:


> I am assuming Romance styles relate to sexual fantasy, and because I am unfamiliar with Socionics, I cannot exactly comment on the information. The "Aggressor" is not specifically an "Se" type, because an INTJ man might be interested in bondage and discipline, or sadism and masochism (BDSM). Viktor Gulenko's ideas do relate to dominant-submissive spectrum in personality types, as posited in this thread.


The aggressor *is* specifically an Se type. All aggressors have Se in the ego, ergo they are all SPs in the MBTI. If you also read about the victim style, as it suggests, the victim tends to take on a submissive role in the relationship as in the victim lets the aggressor think they have the dominance and power over the victim. So of course an INTJ man, as you use an example here, might be interested in BDSM being the victim in the relationship.


----------



## Sparky

ephemereality said:


> The aggressor *is* specifically an Se type. All aggressors have Se in the ego, ergo they are all SPs in the MBTI. If you also read about the victim style, as it suggests, the victim tends to take on a submissive role in the relationship as in the victim lets the aggressor think they have the dominance and power over the victim. So of course an INTJ man, as you use an example here, might be interested in BDSM being the victim in the relationship.


An INTJ man often plays the dominant role in BDSM, or the "aggressor" according to Socionic's Romance styles. In the case of INTJ serial killers, bondage or power over his victim causes the INTJ killer to become sexually aroused.


----------



## MNiS

Depends on how developed a society is. Earlier societies gravitate to "might makes right" types of mentalities which happen to correspond to Ti with Fe to smooth over such a ghastly view. The more advanced a society becomes the more a later society would abandon notions of dominance and submission and perhaps adopt a more egalitarian view. Maybe, maybe not.

I've been reading up on the subject of anthropology lately and it's amazing how similar the rise and fall of empires are. Fascinating.


----------



## Entropic

Sparky said:


> An INTJ man often plays the dominant role in BDSM, or the "aggressor" according to Socionic's Romance styles.


You have zero sources to back this up. 



> In the case of INTJ serial killers, bondage or power over his victim causes the INTJ killer to become sexually aroused.


Again, nothing to back this up with. It's like you are making up stuff out of thin air. Doesn't work.


----------



## Sparky

ephemereality said:


> You have zero sources to back this up.
> 
> Again, nothing to back this up with. It's like you are making up stuff out of thin air. Doesn't work.


You are welcome to read about INTJ serial killers:
http://personalitycafe.com/intj-forum-scientists/165502-intj-serial-killer.html


----------



## Entropic

Sparky said:


> You are welcome to read about INTJ serial killers:
> http://personalitycafe.com/intj-forum-scientists/165502-intj-serial-killer.html


LOL. That's not a source, plus no one agrees with your typings for a reason. I won't really bother checking because I have no time to do that, but I bet none of those people are actual INTJs as in NiTe.


----------



## spiderfrommars

Whether or not an INTJ man would enjoy being a dom is hardly the point, because aggressor/victim relations aren't actually the same as BDSM.


----------



## Entropic

spiderfrommars said:


> Whether or not an INTJ man would enjoy being a dom is hardly the point, because aggressor/victim relations aren't actually the same as BDSM.


I agree to an extent, though I wouldn't claim they are entirely separate either.


----------



## spiderfrommars

I see the connection, but BDSM is a very fixed kind of power play. In contrast, the aggressor and victim are constantly fighting, and the most important quality for a victim to have is to be able to keep up. So the victim might appear, for a brief period, to have more power. That's the impression I got. In BDSM, the roles are very rigid.


----------



## Nightchill

Sparky said:


> ENFP, INFP


Pardon me, you are mistaken about this. 

Not all ENFPs and INFPs are the same. I'd say majority aren't submissive. Our 'secret' is that we have S and for that matter Si low in hierarchy, INFPs seem especially 'submissive' because of our overall introverted tendency to dwell inside of our selves and our inner world of ideas and dreams. There is little visible 'external' energy.

Se is there in the moment, therefore you can feel their physical presence. They are part of now body and mind. We have Si.
Te is external and and functions in this regard similarly to Se - assertiveness (+need for structure).

Both are usually low in our hierarchy. 

The word you're looking for is 'assertive' not dominating. Try mocking an E/INFPs identity and dreams and ESFJs will be humbled. 

The most traditional female types I know irl are actually ISFJ. Go figure that. They try to be 'modern' and are somewhat independent, but they're still usually stuck with tradition much. 

ENFPs notice social norms but doesn't give much of a damn. My ENFP friend is the most independent person I know of.
Chances are INFP is utterly oblivious to the norms. (my case)

If I looked for energy somewhere it would be astrology and birth chart. A lot of manliness in mine I assure you.


----------



## Sixty Nein

Sparky said:


> Most dominant or least submissive energy fields
> 1. ENTP, INTP, ESFJ, ISFJ (Ne, Ti, Fe, Si) - Most dominant
> 
> 2. INTJ, ENTJ, ISFP, ESFP (Ni, Te, Fi, Se) - Second most dominant
> 
> 3. INFJ, ENFJ, ISTP, ESTP (Ni, Fe, Ti, Se) - Third most dominant
> 
> 4. ENFP, INFP, ESTJ, ISTJ (Ne, Fi, Te, Si) - Least dominant
> Least dominant or most submissive energy fields


I honestly wonder how you came to this particular nugget of understanding. It's interesting to me, and I'm not really interested in the socionics interpretation of the Se-Si at this moment FYI. Is the Adam, Eve and Lilith parallel the only thing that you reference?


----------



## Sparky

ephemereality said:


> LOL. That's not a source, plus no one agrees with your typings for a reason. I won't really bother checking because I have no time to do that, but I bet none of those people are actual INTJs as in NiTe.


Unless you know what people Viktor Gulenko typed as being Se and "aggressors", you cannot claim his system to be more accurate. It is better to do your own research, and not trust the typings of people you believe to be "experts" in personality.


----------



## Entropic

Sparky said:


> Unless you know what people Viktor Gulenko typed as being Se and "aggressors", you cannot claim his system to be more accurate. It is better to do your own research, and not trust the typings of people you believe to be "experts" in personality.


I know what type of people Gulenko describes as aggressors, because socionics is very clear on what they define as egoic Se types.


----------



## Sparky

Nightchill said:


> Pardon me, you are mistaken about this.
> 
> Not all ENFPs and INFPs are the same. I'd say majority aren't submissive. Our 'secret' is that we have S and for that matter Si low in hierarchy, INFPs seem especially 'submissive' because of our overall introverted tendency to dwell inside of our selves and our inner world of ideas and dreams. There is little visible 'external' energy.
> 
> Se is there in the moment, therefore you can feel their physical presence. They are part of now body and mind. We have Si.
> Te is external and and functions in this regard similarly to Se - assertiveness (+need for structure).
> 
> Both are usually low in our hierarchy.
> 
> The word you're looking for is 'assertive' not dominating. Try mocking an E/INFPs identity and dreams and ESFJs will be humbled.
> 
> The most traditional female types I know irl are actually ISFJ. Go figure that. They try to be 'modern' and are somewhat independent, but they're still usually stuck with tradition much.
> 
> ENFPs notice social norms but doesn't give much of a damn. My ENFP friend is the most independent person I know of.
> Chances are INFP is utterly oblivious to the norms. (my case)
> 
> If I looked for energy somewhere it would be astrology and birth chart. A lot of manliness in mine I assure you.


You might be a mistyped INTJ, so I cannot verify your claims. 



Sixty Nein said:


> I honestly wonder how you came to this particular nugget of understanding. It's interesting to me, and I'm not really interested in the socionics interpretation of the Se-Si at this moment FYI. Is the Adam, Eve and Lilith parallel the only thing that you reference?


Hi, the Adam-Lilith story is the first that comes to mind when discussing dominant-submissive energy and sexual fantasy. The information comes from personal experience observing people, and my feelings about them. 



ephemereality said:


> I know what type of people Gulenko describes as aggressors, because socionics is very clear on what they define as egoic Se types.


You need to know the names of the people Gulenko typed as Se or aggressors, because the people he typed could well be misidentified INTJ. The reason the people listed in "INTJ Serial Killers" thread are identified as INTJ, is because they share more commonalities with each other, than members of other personality types.


----------



## Entropic

Sparky said:


> You need to know the names of the people Gulenko typed as Se or aggressors, because the people he typed could well be misidentified INTJ.


Why do I need to know of any specific names? But sure, I'll give you examples:

GRArkada, ISTP





Grimmjow, ESTP:





Nero, ISFP:





Dante, ESTP:





Mugen, ESFP:








> The reason the people listed in "INTJ Serial Killers" thread are identified as INTJ, is because they share more commonalities with each other, than members of other personality types.


You mean, *you* identified based on the commonalities *you* see but those commonalities do not necessarily match the system meant to describe them.


----------



## Psychopomp

This whole discussion is a hoot. For the sake of the whole sexual energy thing... dominant and submissive is the weirdest thing to me. It really does seem like an Se thing. I have only discussed this topic in depth with NFPs and NFJs, as far as I can tell, and in the case of me and NFP, the answer is a big fat N/A. Couldn't be bothered and if someone was thinking in that regard I suspect Ne types would, if my own sentiment and the discussions I have had are any indication, it sounds obnoxious as hell and kinda made up. 

I am not big into Socionics, and I chafe at the implied Caregiver / Infantile dichotomy and the implications of that... though I don't reject it either. By that system my wife (NeFi) and I are both Infantile. Lots of joking around, trying to see things in a new light, lots of focus on reciprocation, nothing too serious, 'power' isn't even a thing. 

If someone got on about 'keeping up' or superiority or any of that, either hearing of it in another relationship or being with a girl who thought like that, I would be completely unable to take them seriously. I very much would expect the same from an NFP. 

Also, the idea of sexual psychology being tied to Se and Ne does seem to make a lot of sense, at least in the context of that particular dichotomy. 

All that being said, I SUSPECT there is a natural, default dominate/submissive role tendency male to female. Exceptions, doubtlessly, abound. The thing is, it just sort of ends up that way in my 'Ne' relationship. The instant one of us thought to take it seriously, we'd both just laugh and then do the other thing for a laugh or just to deconstruct it. Eventually, though, in terms of routine, it would drift back to a more traditional male / female role until we decided to deconstruct it again, in another way.


----------



## d e c a d e n t

Eh, I'll admit that the thought of how "sexual energy" manifests in the different types is interesting to me, though I think it likely depends on the individual. And then there's the fact that people can have different ideas of what dominance and submission means, as seen in this very thread as well. When I think of ENTP, for example, dominant isn't the first word that comes to my mind, but that depends on what you think of as dominance.


----------



## Sparky

A better way to examine the points in the opening post, is to respond with your personality type, and how you fantasize about sex, like whether you more often play the dominant or submissive role. The downside is that if you are mistyped and not realize it, then your response might not be truthful, as in the case when an INTJ is mistyped as INFP or ISTP.




ephemereality said:


> You mean, *you* identified based on the commonalities *you* see but those commonalities do not necessarily match the system meant to describe them.


The system is made and modified according to the facts, and the truth does not conform to the systems.


----------



## Sixty Nein

I think that the assumption based on that premise of how energy is formed in the mind of a person of various egotic function orientations is a tad wrong actually. I am using the definition of the BDSM terminology of Domination and Submission. (What most think of D/S is actually merely Brutality (A state of a person's needs being physically trampled over the other) and Barbarism (A group sponsored parallel that is much harder to detect) The dominant "Positive" energy, the hammer in the communist's emblem is the source of creation, action and force in a deliberate attempt to extract the world's "resources" into the person's being by obeying the will of the world. It is action of energy exchange by making oneself a physical presence of the world instead of something that is against it. The world is therefor not merely a concept to them, but something that is actually felt. Not only is it merely "felt" to them but it is also something that they control entirely. The world and themselves are in synch, but that is the delusion felt as the "world" has no inate purpose, it's just that their conception of the world has the affects of this happening, in which meaning is supplanted into the world, in the hopes of impregnating it, in one's image.

Submission on the other hand is the opposite of that. It is the "negative" energy, the sickle to the hammer's left and right side. A state of perpetual self and other devouring by integrating the will of the world and debasing it's very essence for consumption. A narcissistic ouroboros projecting onto objects, allowing for the person's maw to shrink and destroy the world. In spite of this, the person has no "will" of their own, it is merely their reaction (not being) that allows for their character to happen. In this sense, they merely exist for the world and the world makes it's mark onto the state of person's with whatever sadistic impulses the world may muster. The submission comes from the fact that the person finds joy in this, it is a game in which two "people" constantly hunt each other for all eternity, it is never about supplanting the will of the world into them, insomuch as the world is in a constant state of movement and the person's experiences shape the world instead of their will.

Now that the definitions has been clarified, I shall tell you the basic premise of what I think is the fact of what is the true submissive and dominant energies of the psychic orientations of the Jungian Cognitive functions.

-Most Dominant Group (using socionics terms as a short hand)-

Delta
Gamma/Alpha
Beta

-least Dominant Group (using socionics terms as a short hand)


----------



## Kabosu

It seems like you're taking this so called concept seriously lol. (Re: op)


----------



## Entropic

Sparky said:


> A better way to examine the points in the opening post, is to respond with your personality type, and how you fantasize about sex, like whether you more often play the dominant or submissive role. The downside is that if you are mistyped and not realize it, then your response might not be truthful, as in the case when an INTJ is mistyped as INFP or ISTP.


Really? Well, I tend to prefer being more submissive to be honest, and I am very sure of being an INTJ. So again there you go, proven incorrect. 



> The system is made and modified according to the facts, and the truth does not conform to the systems.


And your system is not? How can you type at all and even more so accurately if you are not choosing to conform to the system you are typing people in?


----------



## d e c a d e n t

Sparky said:


> A better way to examine the points in the opening post, is to respond with your personality type, and how you fantasize about sex, like whether you more often play the dominant or submissive role.


Why don't you start? Unless you already did and I missed it. 

Seriously though: I'm unsure of my type, but I'm thinking it's likely INFP. My fantasies are varied and usually do not involve myself. I suppose I see some attraction to either role.



> The downside is that if you are mistyped and not realize it, then your response might not be truthful, as in the case when an INTJ is mistyped as INFP or ISTP.


Mistypings is one problem, yes.


----------



## Kabosu

I don't perceive the OP as Ni dom or even ego intuitive lol.


----------



## Sparky

ephemereality said:


> Really? Well, I tend to prefer being more submissive to be honest, and I am very sure of being an INTJ. So again there you go, proven incorrect.
> 
> And your system is not? How can you type at all and even more so accurately if you are not choosing to conform to the system you are typing people in?


"Tend to prefer" might mean it is not what you truly want. 

My method of typing people is based on identifying similarities among members of each personality type, and differentiating each person according to how they fit those similarities. It is not specifically a "system" of classification, following rigid guidelines about how every person of a type is supposed to behave. 



Nonsense said:


> Why don't you start? Unless you already did and I missed it.
> 
> Seriously though: I'm unsure of my type, but I'm thinking it's likely INFP. My fantasies are varied and usually do not involve myself. I suppose I see some attraction to either role.
> 
> Mistypings is one problem, yes.


Because your sexual fantasies usually do not involve yourself, maybe you are assuming a more dominant position, possibly as a man in the fantasy.

As an INFJ, my fantasies were often in the submissive position when I first became sexually curious, though dominant fantasies occur as well, possibly when thinking about an ENFP girl. In the later years, this has assumed more of a dominant position, because I find the submissive as not bringing much satisfaction in terms of orgasm. Pornography also reduces the chances for fantasizing, and pushes one viewpoint, the dominant position, to a new extreme. This often makes me feel mentally exhausted and unfulfilled, though physically satisfied. 

Since discovering the concept of dominant and submissive sexual energy, and their relation to personality types, I often fantasize myself in the submissive position, with an ENTP partner. It feels very awkward when assuming a more dominant position, with an ENTP, in the fantasy. This fantasizing has made me feel more mentally charged or energized in the mornings, and more satisfied. I also feel my "outward personal energy" becoming more relaxed, though still learning about managing this energy.



Kabosu said:


> I don't perceive the OP as Ni dom or even ego intuitive lol.


I perceive you might be INTJ, instead of ENTP.


----------



## spiderfrommars

Sparky said:


> "Tend to prefer" might mean you are simply conforming to a preconceived notion that women are supposed to be submissive, and not what you truly want.


What are you referring to here? @ephemereality is a man. What does the idea that women should be submissive have to do with anything?


----------



## d e c a d e n t

Sparky said:


> "Tend to prefer" might mean you are simply conforming to a preconceived notion that women are supposed to be submissive, and not what you truly want.


Why would he worry about that? He's not a woman.



> My method of typing people is based on identifying similarities among members of each personality type, and differentiating each person according to how they fit those similarities. It is not specifically a "system" of classification, following rigid guidelines about how every person of a type is supposed to behave.


What about their cognition? I mean, you listed the cognitive functions in your opening post. Actually I'm curious the reason why you think those functions would lead to this or that role. Why would Te and Ni lead to a dominant energy for example, while Te and Si leads to a submissive energy.



> Because your sexual fantasies usually do not involve yourself, maybe you are assuming a more dominant position, possibly as a man in the fantasy.


Maybe? I mean, I sort of like getting into the head of both characters, but now I'm thinking about fantasies that aren't just wank-fantasies.



> Since discovering the concept of dominant and submissive sexual energy, and their relation to personality types, I often fantasize myself in the submissive position, with an ENTP partner. It feels more awkward when assuming a more dominant position, with an ENTP, in the fantasy. This has made me feel more mentally charged or energized in the mornings, and more satisfied. I also feel my "outward personal energy" becoming more relaxed, though still learning about managing this energy.


Why does it feel more awkward with an ENTP?


----------



## Sparky

spiderfrommars said:


> What are you referring to here? @_ephemereality_ is a man. What does the idea that women should be submissive have to do with anything?


Maybe it's the pink username that confused me about his gender. If he is an INTJ man who likes to assume a submissive position, then it might indicate how he is unsure about himself on the inside, while acting out his true fantasy of being dominant on the outside. This might be a result of being traumatized, for example, after a circumcision, in which the feeling of powerlessness had a lasting impact on the mind of a baby. This powerless feeling later becomes part of his sexual fantasies.

Thank you for pointing out his gender, and I have changed that sentence, about preconceived notions of being submissive as a woman.


----------



## Sparky

Nonsense said:


> Why would he worry about that? He's not a woman.
> 
> What about their cognition? I mean, you listed the cognitive functions in your opening post. Actually I'm curious the reason why you think those functions would lead to this or that role. Why would Te and Ni lead to a dominant energy for example, while Te and Si leads to a submissive energy.
> 
> Maybe? I mean, I sort of like getting into the head of both characters, but now I'm thinking about fantasies that aren't just wank-fantasies.
> 
> Why does it feel more awkward with an ENTP?


The pink user name probably confused me about him being a woman.

It is more about the combination of all the functions, and not one or two, that determines dominant or submissive energy. 

What do you mean by "fantasies that are not just wank-fantasies"? Does it mean you fantasize more about being in a dominant position, as a woman? Because you mention how you like to put yourself into the shoes of other people, or "minds", maybe it indicates Fe, and that you are ENTP.

Assuming a dominating position with an ENTP in a sexual fantasy is very awkward, because the energetics does not feel right, so it is much harder to reach orgasm.


----------



## Sixty Nein

Explanation of the functional orientation of Domination and Submission.

I think it is a tad more obvious to explain the reason as to why the Te-Fi is dominant and Fe-Ti is submissive. Still my brain and reasoning for my results should be questioned, even if I am right, I would be right in the wrong way if I am not honest with you all.

So first we will explain Te-Fi. Te is the spray can that the fingers of Fi direct to express a painting of their own desires. What happens to the wall in this situation does not matter as the will of the person does not care about this unless their own property is at risk. The painting is beautiful, as it is the person themselves in their own untranslatedability. Marked onto the world by whatever means strikes the individuals fancy. The only thing comprehensible was how the quiver of the pin was stroked, the words themselves but never the sheer feeling intensity behind it. Because of their alignment with and against the world, they see others as self-programmed robotics, designed to follow protocol and instructions from their clear superiors. This self-roboticization creates an epidemic of passions being stomped onto the ground, and pragmatism abandoned to fulfill one's own dream. Would you say that it's a dream to call oneself a god of judgement, the mercy of the god in particular being at the whim of inconsistent and even illogical desires. Even if those sentiments could ever be touched by programing that they themselves have wrought onto the world and themselves?

Fe-Ti the somewhat more difficult to explain submission is brought up by the pop cultural phenomenon known as "Neon Genesis Evangelion". Particularly in the form of the instrumentality project. A sort of collective "formative will without the absolute separation of the absolute terror fields (Ti)". Indeed one can say that submission is not harmonious with the environment insomuch as it is a constant THIRST for it, which cannot ever really be quenched. The unquenchableness of the whole reality that is evaluated by the two judgement functions, the need to differentiate and the need to conform is the source of the woes and joys of the person as a whole. Ti as an artists is not particularly concerned with the translatability of their own artworks, unlike the Te-Fi ones. Who is more concerned with having the world painted on, and forming the impression of others through their own beauty. Indeed the mechanization of Ti is complex and arbitrary, without the need of the world insomuch as the world's work is reconstructed to fit into the Ti's ego drive. The gears in the artwork of Ti is wrapped between the soothing genericness of Fe to create an all inclusiveness. This is however a nice pretense, a coyful smile that beacons others to rape in it's entirety. Destruction, assimilation. The mere basicness is absorbed, the artifice is kept alive. Understanding that they have never had programmed themselves, but the objects they place into them makes them different than the rest.

Si-Ne relationship to domination can best be described in it's relationship to an object, for the sake of this argument it's in the shape of a cross. In the objective sense, the cross in the representative of the christian faith manifest. Si-Ne does not particularly see this. Si in particular is the delusion of a human that rejects reality's prospects at face value and interjects objects with a sense of animation that is not typically seen in the vocabulary. The cross is no longer merely just that, but also a personality in its own. It smiles, it dances despite it's incapability. What can it do? It is infinite to merely list the capabilities of the illusion, as the person controls it with their will. This person seeks to defend it's impression from the reality of the world. The cross would be destroyed if that happened. To sustain this illusion the person adopts the character of an all interested person who exploits opportunities in the world, implanting their creative energies into prospects and allowing their imaginations to become manifest in real time. However this person's sight is never particularly seen to the world. Indeed the world's gravity sinks the ethereal, faery magnanimity into a bolt of joints with screws that just happen to create the motion of movement. The person does not understand this though, to them the object has a life of it's own.

Se-Ni sees the world as being comprised of material. This automatically creates a borderline nihilistic understanding of the world at the get go, they cannot just ego judge things as their perceptions will not let reality get in the way. This is naturally submissive, in it's attitude of course. The material is just that, a thing that exists. A thing to be examined and slavished over. With a mere flick of the eye, one can get a sense of what the thing is with in a quick shift. It is not the meaning that maters insomuch as it is correctness. They seek to make objects the correct form, and grab these materials into their own ends. They give themselves the power of a god, writing ancient scrolls that described things, what they stood for, what their property is. The world does not respond to this at all, letting the mortals toil along with the works that they have created. A monument is not just the hollow imitation of a person's geometry. It is the nation's entire ethnic history distilled into a singular person. A figurehead of the past that illustrates the accomplishments of all. Humanities self loathing could not let this truth be known, so it must be pass down onto an object instead. Infusing it with metaphysical properties that would never be there in the first place. God, Gods are all just descriptions of unknown things that primitives could not understand. As there is no mysticism for people of this type, there is merely what is true. What exists. The arch that connects all of the things into a singular whole, or a whole that explains a lot of the world. It does not matter, as they are the ones that write the bible. The authors of wisdom, with a book already written in their minds.


----------



## tangosthenes

I don't think you are isolating the letters properly..


----------



## Kabosu

Lots of kinky talk on the boards about S & N.
Thread calls for such a pun though I believe my idea to post this comes from the most recent post here.


----------



## Erbse

spiderfrommars said:


> I don't get it. Why is IP more dominant than EJ? What about introversion has more dominant energy? What about perceiving? The stereotype is the opposite. What's your reason for interpreting it this way?


IP types are judgers rather than perceivers since they lead with either Fi or Ti in their function stack.


----------



## spiderfrommars

Erbse said:


> IP types are judgers rather than perceivers since they lead with either Fi or Ti in their function stack.


I know that. @_Sparky_ said that "P is more dominant than J," and then went on to clarify that in his system, IP was most dominant and EJ least dominant. He was referring to an xxxP code, not leading with a perceiving function. I was wondering what his meaning was. If judging first is more dominant than perceiving first, EJ wouldn't be least dominant in his understanding. EP would.


----------



## Sparky

spiderfrommars said:


> I know that. @_Sparky_ said that "P is more dominant than J," and then went on to clarify that in his system, IP was most dominant and EJ least dominant. He was referring to an xxxP code, not leading with a perceiving function. I was wondering what his meaning was. If judging first is more dominant than perceiving first, EJ wouldn't be least dominant in his understanding. EP would.


The conclusions are based on personal observations and experience. It also makes sense, because more girls type themselves as judging, while more boys type as perceiving. Similarly, more boys type as introverted, while more girls type themselves as extroverted. If dominant-submissive energy determines sex differentiation in early evolutionary process, then one would assume the dominant traits exhibit more in males, and submissive traits show more often in females. 



Blissful Melancholy said:


> Did you go around snooping in people's sex lives?


You are welcome to conduct a study on the topics discussed in this thread, if you have the resources, or know people who do. The questions to answer include:

1. How do sexual fantasies between circumcised men differ from uncircumcised men? (watching pornography does not count)
2. Do circumcised men prefer more submissive fantasies (due to childhood trauma associated with cutting of foreskin) compared to uncircumcised men?
3. What sexual fantasies (if any) do circumcised men have while masturbating, assuming that they do masturbate? (masturbating while watching pornography does not count)

4. How do sexual fantasies differ between NF and NT people? (assuming they do not use pornography to masturbate)
5. Are NF people more energized by submissive sexual fantasies, while NT people are energized by dominant sexual fantasies?
6. Do different body types between NF and NT people account for the different sexual fantasies? 
7. How do men have submissive sexual fantasies? In those fantasies, do men picture themselves as vulnerable women?
8. How do women have dominant sexual fantasies? In those fantasies, do women picture themselves as sexually aggressive men?
9. After a period of fantasizing about dominant sexual fantasies, do NF people feel more energized? How about for submissive sexual fantasies?
10. After a period of fantasizing about submissive sexual fantasies, do NT people feel more energized? How about for dominant sexual fantasies?

NF and NT divisions are used in the questions as examples. You can think of it as (NF, ST) and (NT, SF). 

You can give surveys to INTJ and ENFP (since they appear more common in the population), and ask them about sexual fantasies. 

I also want to do more research about the dominant-submissive energy spectrum in personality types (the spectrum is better viewed as a three-dimensional band or circle, with one end connecting back to the other end):

......
14. ISTJ
15. ENFP
16. ESTJ - least dominant, most submissive energy

1. INTP - most dominant, least submissive energy
2. ISFJ
3. ENTP
4. ESFJ

5. ISFP
6. INTJ
7. ESFP
8. ENTJ

9. ISTP
10. INFJ
11. ESTP
12. ENFJ

13. INFP
14. ISTJ
15. ENFP
16. ESTJ - least dominant, most submissive energy

1. INTP - most dominant, least submissive energy
2. ISFJ
3. ENTP
......


----------



## Psithurism

Sparky said:


> You are welcome to conduct a study on the topics discussed in this thread, if you have the resources, or know people who do.


Why are you asking me to do what you should be doing yourself? I'm not defending this theory or trying to prove it.

You can't just make outlandish claims and simply back them up with something along the lines of ''these are my observations'' and vague references to religious characters.


----------



## Sparky

Blissful Melancholy said:


> Why are you asking me to do what you should be doing yourself? I'm not defending this theory or trying to prove it.
> 
> You can't just make outlandish claims and simply back them up with something along the lines of ''these are my observations'' and vague references to religious characters.


I figure you might be more connected with the scientific community on psychology. It is all right if you are not, and have no means to conduct a scientific research on the subject matter. Also, all scientific inquiries begin with observations, sort of like how Darwin discovered evolution.


----------



## Psithurism

Sparky said:


> I figure you might be more connected with the scientific community on psychology. It is all right if you are not, and have no means to conduct a scientific research on the subject matter.


I'm not interested in your assumptions about me. Why not just mention scientific sources instead?



> Also, all scientific inquiries begin with observations, sort of like how Darwin discovered evolution.


They do stem from observations, of course, but they don't rest solely on personal observations/impressions. At some point you must go a step further if you want your theory to be considered seriously.


----------



## Sparky

I am still interested in further research, and might create polls for people to fill out. The following spectrum still needs to be investigated, and if anybody knows of research articles that already exist on the subject matter of dominant-submissive energy, please share.

......
14. ISTJ
15. ENFP
16. ESTJ - least dominant, most submissive energy

1. INTP - most dominant, least submissive energy
2. ISFJ
3. ENTP
4. ESFJ

5. ISFP
6. INTJ
7. ESFP
8. ENTJ

9. ISTP
10. INFJ
11. ESTP
12. ENFJ

13. INFP
14. ISTJ
15. ENFP
16. ESTJ - least dominant, most submissive energy

1. INTP - most dominant, least submissive energy
2. ISFJ
3. ENTP
......

Given how often people think about sex, sexual fantasies play a major role in human psychology, so the subject requires further investigations and research:

1. How do sexual fantasies between circumcised men differ from uncircumcised men? (watching pornography does not count)
2. Do circumcised men prefer more submissive fantasies (due to childhood trauma associated with cutting of foreskin) compared to uncircumcised men?
3. What sexual fantasies (if any) do circumcised men have while masturbating, assuming that they do masturbate? (masturbating while watching pornography does not count)

4. How do sexual fantasies differ between NF and NT people? (assuming they do not use pornography to masturbate)
5. Are NF people more energized by submissive sexual fantasies, while NT people are energized by dominant sexual fantasies?
6. Do different body types between NF and NT people account for the different sexual fantasies? 
7. How do men have submissive sexual fantasies? In those fantasies, do men picture themselves as vulnerable women?
8. How do women have dominant sexual fantasies? In those fantasies, do women picture themselves as sexually aggressive men?
9. After a period of fantasizing about dominant sexual fantasies, do NF people feel more energized? How about for submissive sexual fantasies?
10. After a period of fantasizing about submissive sexual fantasies, do NT people feel more energized? How about for dominant sexual fantasies?


----------



## Sixty Nein

Why don't you ask the sex forum for that? I'm sure they'd be more willing to oblige.


----------



## Blystone

There is an UGLY secret hidden behind the bars from which you think of! Please consult me if you need any further guidance.The ugly gene is a very serious illness.


----------



## Entropic

Sparky said:


> I am still interested in further research, and might create polls for people to fill out. The following spectrum still needs to be investigated, and if anybody knows of research articles that already exist on the subject matter of dominant-submissive energy, please share.
> 
> ......
> 14. ISTJ
> 15. ENFP
> 16. ESTJ - least dominant, most submissive energy
> 
> 1. INTP - most dominant, least submissive energy
> 2. ISFJ
> 3. ENTP
> 4. ESFJ
> 
> 5. ISFP
> 6. INTJ
> 7. ESFP
> 8. ENTJ
> 
> 9. ISTP
> 10. INFJ
> 11. ESTP
> 12. ENFJ
> 
> 13. INFP
> 14. ISTJ
> 15. ENFP
> 16. ESTJ - least dominant, most submissive energy
> 
> 1. INTP - most dominant, least submissive energy
> 2. ISFJ
> 3. ENTP
> ......
> 
> Given how often people think about sex, sexual fantasies play a major role in human psychology, so the subject requires further investigations and research:
> 
> 1. How do sexual fantasies between circumcised men differ from uncircumcised men? (watching pornography does not count)
> 2. Do circumcised men prefer more submissive fantasies (due to childhood trauma associated with cutting of foreskin) compared to uncircumcised men?
> 3. What sexual fantasies (if any) do circumcised men have while masturbating, assuming that they do masturbate? (masturbating while watching pornography does not count)
> 
> 4. How do sexual fantasies differ between NF and NT people? (assuming they do not use pornography to masturbate)
> 5. Are NF people more energized by submissive sexual fantasies, while NT people are energized by dominant sexual fantasies?
> 6. Do different body types between NF and NT people account for the different sexual fantasies?
> 7. How do men have submissive sexual fantasies? In those fantasies, do men picture themselves as vulnerable women?
> 8. How do women have dominant sexual fantasies? In those fantasies, do women picture themselves as sexually aggressive men?
> 9. After a period of fantasizing about dominant sexual fantasies, do NF people feel more energized? How about for submissive sexual fantasies?
> 10. After a period of fantasizing about submissive sexual fantasies, do NT people feel more energized? How about for dominant sexual fantasies?


I would actually recommend you taking a couple of courses/reading up on how sociology and its methodologies first...


----------



## Word Dispenser

Sparky said:


> Jewish mythology mentions how Lilith was chosen as Adam's first wife, and rejected Adam, because she does not want to be submissive. Before, I understand this in a more physical context, though after learning about how everything is energy, this might be viewed in terms of energy exchange. It is possible that dominant and submissive energy fields are present in all organisms, and transcend the sex domains of male or female. The dominance or submissiveness of this energy field is associated with personality types, and below is a presentation of personality types (grouped by cognitive function usage), and their rank order in the dominance spectrum:
> 
> Most dominant or least submissive energy fields
> 1. ENTP, INTP, ESFJ, ISFJ (Ne, Ti, Fe, Si) - Most dominant
> 
> 2. INTJ, ENTJ, ISFP, ESFP (Ni, Te, Fi, Se) - Second most dominant
> 
> 3. INFJ, ENFJ, ISTP, ESTP (Ni, Fe, Ti, Se) - Third most dominant
> 
> 4. ENFP, INFP, ESTJ, ISTJ (Ne, Fi, Te, Si) - Least dominant
> Least dominant or most submissive energy fields
> 
> Viewing the Biblical story about Lilith and Adam in this context, it is possible, for example, that Lilith is ENTP, who rejected Adam after refusing to submit, and instead, Adam married Eve, who happens to be ENFP. This dominant or submissive energy might be a precursor to the appearance of sexes. It determines the method of exchange involving energy and information transfer. The concept is very speculative, though the idea does shed light on the presence of dominant or submissive energies in people, according to their personality types.
> 
> The energy described has to do with sexual attraction, in finding suitable mates, and not how someone organizes his environment. The dominant or submissive aspect has to do with how the first living organisms are not differentiated by male or female, therefore, dominant or submissive energy fields play a role in information or energy exchange. This thread is based on the same thread in the Philosophy or Critical Thinking forum, which is suggested to be discussed in the Cognitive Functions forum as well. Thank you.
> 
> Based on this thread:
> On the Subject of Dominant or Submissive Energy, Personality Types, and the Sexes


----------



## FallingSlowly

At risk of stating the obvious:

A lot of dominant/submissive behaviour in relationships (no matter if you want to look at it physically or mentally) is down to

a) biology (higher testosterone = higher likelihood of sexually and otherwise dominant behaviour)
b) social conditioning/gender stereotypes
c) personal history

I think we can possibly try to shoehorn all of this into some perceived correlation or even causation with regards to MBTI, psychological type and/or cognition, but I somewhat have an inkling the reasoning would become circular 

If you look at D/s specifically: Some pretty extensive studies have been done on the subject, and the ones that include percentages about dominant and submissive behaviour with regards to gender-split all come to pretty similar results:
Most women (usually hovering between 70 and 80%, depending on study) are subs, under 10% are Dommes, the rest are switches.
For men, it's more or less the opposite, although the percentage of submissive men is slightly higher in relation (usually between 20 and 30%, again depending on study)

So whatever way you want to twist and turn it: 
The correlation between a D/s preference and gender is pretty obvious. 

The interesting ones are the outliers (female Dommes, male subs). I don't know if I personally believe there is a relation to psychological type. I have no proof either way, I'm not aware of any studies on that particular question, and I know my way around the subject quite well, both for personal and formerly professional reasons (not _that_ type of profession, I'm strictly speaking field of study ).

I could try a half-arsed attempt about projection, Anima/Animus-complex or -integration, Shadow (and I could possibly shoehorn functions into that attempt Beebe-style), but honestly - I think it'd be bordering on comical...


----------



## Sparky

I might have looked at this partly from a family or career oriented perspective, because ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ, ISTJ, ESTJ, ESTP, ISTP are more career driven, while ISFJ, ESFJ, ESFP, ISFP, ENFP, INFP, INFJ, ENFJ are more family driven. I have come to believe that Ne-Si is associated with masculine energy, while Ni-Se is feminine energy.


----------



## ninjahitsawall

I always thought the functions came down to active/passive (judging and perceiving functions). This is so much more convoluted
:laughing:

If it is down to active/passive then dominant perceptive functions would be more "submissive" (if submissiveness refers to passivity) and dominant judging functions would be more "dominant (if dominance refers to activeness).

This would mean that the dominant types are: ISTP, INTP, INFP, ISFP, ENTJ, ESTJ, ENFJ, ESFJ. 

Sub types: ISTJ, INTJ, INFJ, ISFJ, ENTP, ESTP, ENFP, ESFP. 

This is counter-intuitive to how we consider dominance/submission. Doesn't mean it's wrong (yes an Ni-dom just said that lol), but according to the MBTI system I think it is the most precise way to separate it out.

Also consider that some philosophies, such as some schools of Hindu philosophy, considered a passive, unchanging energy to be "masculine" while a changing, active and dynamic nature/matter is "feminine". This is where they derived certain avatars, such as the goddess Devi ('divine feminine'). This seems unrelated to dominance/submission (which is ironic given modern-day gender relations in India relative to westernized cultures with Judeo-Christian heritages, but I digress).


----------



## thealchemist

Sparky said:


> Jewish mythology mentions how Lilith was chosen as Adam's first wife, and rejected Adam, because she does not want to be submissive. Before, I understand this in a more physical context, though after learning about how everything is energy, this might be viewed in terms of energy exchange. It is possible that dominant and submissive energy fields are present in all organisms, and transcend the sex domains of male or female. The dominance or submissiveness of this energy field is associated with personality types, and below is a presentation of personality types (grouped by cognitive function usage), and their rank order in the dominance spectrum:
> 
> Most dominant or least submissive energy fields
> 1. ENTP, INTP, ESFJ, ISFJ (Ne, Ti, Fe, Si) - Most dominant
> 
> 2. INTJ, ENTJ, ISFP, ESFP (Ni, Te, Fi, Se) - Second most dominant
> 
> 3. INFJ, ENFJ, ISTP, ESTP (Ni, Fe, Ti, Se) - Third most dominant
> 
> 4. ENFP, INFP, ESTJ, ISTJ (Ne, Fi, Te, Si) - Least dominant
> Least dominant or most submissive energy fields
> 
> 
> Based on this thread:
> On the Subject of Dominant or Submissive Energy, Personality Types, and the Sexes


Call me judgemental but:

Most dominant:
1.ENTP (agree)
INTP(DISAGREE SO MUCH! There's no fucking way. Used to be in a relationship withone for 3 years. This is the least dominant thinking type in my humble opinion)
ESFJ(definitely agree)
ISFJ(that's almost as laughable as the INTP verdict) 

2.
Second most dominant
INTJ(yes) 
ENTJ(yes, if not more dominant)
ISFP(eh...)
ESFP(yes) 

3. Third most dominant
 INFJ(maybe)
 ENFJ(maybe)
 ISTP(maybe)
ESTP(lol hell no)

4.
Least dominant
ENFP(laughable)
INFP(agreed)
ESTJ(I call bull shit)
ISTJ(indifferent)


----------

