# Could any male INTJ help me?



## Bramblestar (Nov 26, 2013)

I want to know how to ask one of your type out? Should I make it simple or should I be crazy? Should I get him alone or do it in a public space? Please help!


----------



## Mbaruh (Aug 22, 2013)

We have a thread in our sub-forum about asking questions, I'm sure you'll get more replies there.
Either way, I think alone is preferable, and please define 'simple' and 'crazy'(!!!).


----------



## Word Dispenser (May 18, 2012)

Uhm... Hmmm...

I think you're going about this all wrong, if you're thinking about asking someone out in a particular way based upon the stereotypes of typology.

In all honesty, INTJs come in many different shapes, sizes, colours, and textures of personality. You should get to know this INTJ as a person, and then proceed to ask them out based on what you know of them.


----------



## an absurd man (Jul 22, 2012)

Speaking for myself... alone is preferred and I would take it more seriously if it was simple and direct. Crazy might make me skeptical of the whole thing unless it's a pretty entertaining and intimate moment kind of crazy (?!).


----------



## Becker (Oct 19, 2013)

You can't just stereotype someone into a Myers-Briggs personality so you know how to ask them out, it's weird. Just ask them out like a normal person.


----------



## Bramblestar (Nov 26, 2013)

yeah, I guess I am being a little stereotypical.


----------



## dvnj22 (Apr 24, 2013)

Bramblestar said:


> I want to know how to ask one of your type out? Should I make it simple or should I be crazy? Should I get him alone or do it in a public space? Please help!


You lure them with excerpts from _a brief history of time. _


----------



## Dark NiTe (Mar 5, 2012)

For the love of God, simply. Do not convolute things with social constructs, don't lie to them, or manipulate them.


----------



## Bramblestar (Nov 26, 2013)

Oh, I absolutely LOVE a brief history of time. It was an amazing book. Weird how I've read it, and I'm in 8th grade!


----------



## Isaiah Joshua (Nov 28, 2013)

Fucking express yourself and let the chips fall where they may. 

Like, seriously. Idc if it's INTJ me or just me but I feel icky with people who try to impress other people. Quoting russell brand, if there's really something between you and the other well there'll always something that will come up.


----------



## sinshred (Dec 1, 2013)

Bramblestar said:


> Should I make it simple or should I be crazy?


Just be yourself


Bramblestar said:


> Should I get him alone or do it in a public space?


Ask him


----------



## Talfdm (Sep 6, 2013)

Word Dispenser said:


> Uhm... Hmmm...
> 
> I think you're going about this all wrong, if you're thinking about asking someone out in a particular way based upon the stereotypes of typology.
> 
> In all honesty, INTJs come in many different shapes, sizes, colours, and textures of personality. You should get to know this INTJ as a person, and then proceed to ask them out based on what you know of them.





Becker said:


> You can't just stereotype someone into a Myers-Briggs personality so you know how to ask them out, it's weird. Just ask them out like a normal person.


:frustrating: I get slightly annoyed when I see statements like these. OP, don't let their slightly condescending & vastly misled remarks discourage you.

I agree INTJs come in many different "shapes, sizes, colours, and textures of personality" due to difference in strength of each cognitive function (refer to psychodynamics) - this results in variation (like enneagram tritypes). However, all INTJs fall within a greater "umbrella", if you will. If you do not agree, you may want to evaluate your time spent on this forum and your respective 2.8k and nigh 150 posts.


And I agree with previous INTJs who posted (a trend, maybe?). In-private is very much preferred as I can reach a conclusion and respond according without external interference & stimuli. Keeps things simple and sweet, but that's just me roud:


----------



## Word Dispenser (May 18, 2012)

Talfdm said:


> :frustrating: I get slightly annoyed when I see statements like these. OP, don't let their slightly condescending & vastly misled remarks discourage you.
> 
> I agree INTJs come in many different "shapes, sizes, colours, and textures of personality" due to difference in strength of each cognitive function (refer to psychodynamics) - this results in variation (like enneagram tritypes). However, all INTJs fall within a greater "umbrella", if you will. If you do not agree, you may want to evaluate your time spent on this forum and your respective 2.8k and nigh 150 posts.
> 
> ...


Hm, so... If I do not agree with your umbrella theory, then my time spent on the forums is wasted? Tee hee. :kitteh:

You amuse me, Picard!

How _easy _that would be to argue! I mean, it's nonsensical ridiculousness at its _finest._

Ah, but I will stay my hand. You are young yet, and have much to learn.

For the sake of your argument, we'll say that each type falls within a general paradigm.

_Even _though that is the case, it's _exceedingly _difficult to type someone from the outside, especially if you don't know that person very well, namely in a 'infatuation' scenario.

So, what if she erroneously comes to the conclusion she needs to approach this 'INTJ' in such and such a way, and gets _completely _blindsided, because she did the opposite of what was required? Maybe she would have naturally done the appropriate action if she knew nothing of typology, and took regular, general advice?

I'm just here to dish out a strong, spicy meal of honesty, here. No more, no less. Don't like it? Don't agree? _Well then, _mister 67 some-odd posts... Baha, kidding. :kitteh:


----------



## Talfdm (Sep 6, 2013)

Word Dispenser said:


> You amuse me, Picard!


I stand ready to serve, m'lady :kitteh:



> How _easy _that would be to argue! I mean, it's nonsensical ridiculousness at its _finest._


Give it a go. I dare ya :wink:



> *For the sake of your argument, we'll say that* *each type falls within a general paradigm*.


Sorry, I had to highlight the whole thing because _this_ is truly "nonsensical ridiculousness at its _finest". _Each type falling within a general paradigm_ is_ the basis of MBTI and other psychoanalysis methods we employ _on this very forum_. Saying otherwise is basically rejecting the very foundation this website is build upon! O.O



> _Even _though that is the case, it's _exceedingly _difficult to type someone from the outside, especially if you don't know that person very well, namely in a 'infatuation' scenario.
> 
> So, what if she erroneously comes to the conclusion she needs to approach this 'INTJ' in such and such a way, and gets _completely _blindsided, because she did the opposite of what was required? Maybe she would have naturally done the appropriate action if she knew nothing of typology, and took regular, general advice?


Well, I trust the OP knows what she is doing when she came specifically for INTJs (first they came... -chuckle-). And you, yourself, acknowledged her typing prowess, however indirectly :kitteh::



Word Dispenser said:


> You should get to know* this INTJ* as a person, and then proceed to ask them out based on what you know of them.


Taadaa! :wink:



> I'm just here to dish out a strong, spicy meal of honesty, here. No more, no less. Don't like it? Don't agree? _Well then, _mister 67 some-odd posts... Baha, kidding. :kitteh:


Ah, I mainly frequent the forum for leisure and research ---> don't do much posting. But this is fun, and lucky me, you're a NT xD I got myself in a pinch in another thread with those SPs; most of my meticulously presented points were ignored and it came down to who could out-post who... ridiculous 

Errr... of course, no offence SPs :crazy: 
(Aside: Apologise, in a trolling mood right now :tongue


Oh, and it seems like I have to include this in certain posts of mine now:

P.S. I went through my education under the British System, where "apologise" is spelt with a "s" instead of a "z". I beseech you, do not bombard me with, and I quote, "Apologise is actually spelled apologize. This was an easy problem to fix, because, of the red line under apologise that indicates spell check. And you get on my case for too many commas, talk about pot calling kettle black."

P.P.S. I'm never letting this one go. It's hilarious :laughing:

P.P.P.S. Sorry for jacking the thread, OP x.x


----------



## Word Dispenser (May 18, 2012)

Talfdm said:


> Sorry, I had to highlight the whole thing because _this_ is truly "nonsensical ridiculousness at its _finest". _Each type falling within a general paradigm_ is_ the basis of MBTI and other psychoanalysis methods we employ _on this very forum_. Saying otherwise is basically rejecting the very foundation this website is build upon! O.O
> 
> Oh, and it seems like I have to include this in certain posts of mine now:
> 
> ...


Lols, I have no interest in correcting arbitrary uses of spelling. I spell it 'colour', gosh durn'd it.

Ahem, but that aside.

The stereotypes we read about in typology are _possibilities, _but not necessarily _absolute _possibilities. You see, I think that, in time, you will find that it's a lot more complex and convoluted than simply pinning the bar code on the group. 

An ESFJ can easily be mistaken for an INTJ, for instance, in behaviour. They are simply reaching the same conclusions, using different processing methods. Figuring that out, as said, is tough, because you only see the _outside _behaviour. You don't see the cause for that behaviour. 

Typology, to me, is just a platform to explain how we see and experience the world. It doesn't explain how we _interact _with it, or behave.

Which explains why behaviour would be universal across types and people. *Shrugs*. You can have a right wing INTJ, and a right wing ISFJ, for the same reason, but different way of getting to that reason.


----------



## Talfdm (Sep 6, 2013)

Word Dispenser said:


> The stereotypes we read about in typology are _possibilities, _but not necessarily _absolute _possibilities. You see, I think that, in time, you will find that it's a lot more complex and convoluted than simply pinning the bar code on the group.
> 
> An ESFJ can easily be mistaken for an INTJ, for instance, in behaviour. They are simply reaching the same conclusions, using different processing methods. Figuring that out, as said, is tough, because you only see the _outside _behaviour. You don't see the cause for that behaviour.
> 
> ...


Fair enough. The typing is the hard bit.

But if you've pinned a "bar-code" on someone and they are, indeed, that particular type, then they will most likely follow a general consensus. It's axiomatic. Well, at least to an extent concerning OP's question (if the current responses are to be believed). 

This has been fun and I hope to see you around roud:


----------



## bluekitdon (Dec 19, 2012)

Bramblestar said:


> I want to know how to ask one of your type out? Should I make it simple or should I be crazy? Should I get him alone or do it in a public space? Please help!


Alone, simple, and straightforward would be my preference.


----------



## Figure (Jun 22, 2011)

Kudos for at least taking the initiative. My recommendation, if the OP feels comfortable with it, would be to simply ask the INTJ if they want to go do the direct thing you wanted to do on the date. It may be true that many INTJ do not fit "stereotype," but I do think the majority have a tendency to rapidly analyze where they are in a given process, including a relationship. 

We do well when we have real data to work from. I am attracted to women who initiate a topic or activity she knows we both enjoy, seemingly for that purpose. That action gives me evidence there's a reason to project forward. It doesn't have to/shouldn't be a lot, just objectively there to begin with.


----------



## Peter (Feb 27, 2010)

Bramblestar said:


> I want to know how to ask one of your type out? Should I make it simple or should I be crazy? Should I get him alone or do it in a public space? Please help!


You've got to find one of us first.... I mean, outside, in the real world, not here online. :laughing:


----------



## Judson Joist (Oct 25, 2013)

Food and a movie are always good for starters.


----------



## Guest (Dec 3, 2013)

Ask him. Be completely honest, no games. Do not profess your undying love at the same time. Give him time to think about it if he doesn't say yes or no directly (time means no pestering, and no panicking). Ask when you are alone together or in a relatively private place. Any attempt to manipulate the situation may cause a potential "yes" to become a "no" out of principle.


----------



## Dao (Sep 13, 2013)

I would have to agree with the other INTJs on here that an earnest yet in-private invitation would be best. Anything else is socially overwhelming and may not result in the response your INTJ would otherwise provide. INTJs do come in all shapes and sizes but this is one exceptional point on which I believe arguing those details is as constructive as arguing that not all INTJs are introverted. Go slow, be honest, ask in private and give him ample time to process his emotions.


----------



## Blacktide (Sep 16, 2012)

I would suggest being very direct (hints will fly right over my head) like saying:
"Joe, I find you attractive would you like to go out for coffee this week end?

Private is almost always better for asking someone out, pressure and onlookers are likely going to only going to hurt your chances.


----------



## Afterburner (Jan 8, 2013)

Simply ask in private and give needed space to process.

That's it.


----------



## Blue Potato (Oct 11, 2013)

You should just go up to him and say, "Hey, you wanna go to the Earth Day movie with our other friends?" I would do that, not to him, to a certain INTP. You should ask him at Science Olympiad. Oh and don't flirt, it'll just ruin the moment.


----------

