# What type is the most likely to be abusive towards their spouse?



## ParetoCaretheStare (Jan 18, 2012)

Estj?
Entp?
Istp?


----------



## stiletto (Oct 26, 2013)

Depends on what kind of abuse you're talking about. Physical? Emotional? Financial? Manipulation can be a form of abuse. You can't really say "all of the above" and measure out which personality type is more prone to abuse. Any unhealthy personality type can end in abuse. 

Are you actually looking for an analysis of abusers? Or are you fishing for a specific answer?

Rationally, abusers want power and control. Stereotypically, the personalities that needs order and control are Js. But that's if we run with stereotypes which is unreliable to begin with.


----------



## PaladinX (Feb 20, 2013)

In my experience as a seasoned armchair psychologist, spousal abuse is more often committed by douchebag and bitchface types than any other type. Furthermore results from various made up researchers in the field overwhelming agree that spousal abuse is caused by douchebagism and bitchfaceoria in 99.8% of spousal abuse cases.


----------



## LaughingIsaac (Oct 29, 2014)

I think this kind of thinking is slightly dangerous. I'm also fairly sure that actually looking into statistical testing wouldn't lead conclusive results. I think MBTI shows more about 'Why?' someone will act the way they do, and that it can't necessarily always predict 'How?' one will act.


----------



## Fleurelle (Oct 19, 2014)

stiletto said:


> Depends on what kind of abuse you're talking about. Physical? Emotional? Financial? Manipulation can be a form of abuse. You can't really say "all of the above" and measure out which personality type is more prone to abuse. Any unhealthy personality type can end in abuse.
> 
> Are you actually looking for an analysis of abusers? Or are you fishing for a specific answer?
> 
> Rationally, abusers want power and control. Stereotypically, the personalities that needs order and control are Js.* But that's if we run with stereotypes which is unreliable to begin with.*


Yeah, this. I've known some uber-controlling and, yes, abusive Ps. You don't have to be organised etc. to be abusive.


----------



## FourLeafCloafer (Aug 5, 2014)

[No message]


----------



## Fleurelle (Oct 19, 2014)

stultum said:


> A J will hit you in the face at regular intervals, a P will do it randomly?


I don't think abuse is a laughing matter.


----------



## FourLeafCloafer (Aug 5, 2014)

Fleurelle said:


> I don't think abuse is a laughing matter.


Anything not worth joking about is not worth being taken seriously. This thread is inherently flawed in proposing that some types are more prone to being abusers than others, we might just make it a bit better by not taking it too seriously. You can make a joke about more or less everything. The DDR wasn't very funny either. Still, some of the best jokes I know are making fun of the system (A bunch of bunnies are trying to get over the Berlin wall. A man stops and asks them why. They say 'well, a new law dictates that all giraffes are to be executed.' 'But you aren't giraffes!' the man says. 'Yeah, but we can't prove that!') 

I take both typist behaviour and domestic abuse very seriously. I only make jokes about things that I find important, at the people who are being idiots. I will never make a joke at the expense of a concrete victim. That's just being a jerk. I will, however, ridicule the perpetrator, because they don't deserve better. Joking is my default coping mechanism.

I was not trying to be offensive. I was trying to be funny. If you didn't find it funny, or if you are offended, then I apologize, but there is very little I can do about it.

I'm sorry if I am blowing this out of proportion, but I thought that it was useful to describe the criteria by which I decide to make jokes about things.


----------



## Fleurelle (Oct 19, 2014)

stultum said:


> Anything not worth joking about is not worth being taken seriously. This thread is inherently flawed in proposing that some types are more prone to being abusers than others, we might just make it a bit better by not taking it too seriously. You can make a joke about more or less everything. The DDR wasn't very funny either. Still, some of the best jokes I know are making fun of the system (A bunch of bunnies are trying to get over the Berlin wall. A man stops and asks them why. They say 'well, a new law dictates that all giraffes are to be executed.' 'But you aren't giraffes!' the man says. 'Yeah, but we can't prove that!')
> 
> I take both typist behaviour and domestic abuse very seriously. I only make jokes about things that I find important, at the people who are being idiots. I will never make a joke at the expense of a concrete victim. That's just being a jerk. I will, however, ridicule the perpetrator, because they don't deserve better. Joking is my default coping mechanism.
> 
> ...


As someone who's been through severe abuse, I didn't see your statement as making fun of the perpetrator so much as the actual victims of domestic violence. People being hit in the face and terrorised is not funny, and had you ever been through something like that, I *highly* doubt you would seriously come on here and make statements along the lines of "anything not worth joking about is not worth taking seriously". Or write an essay defending joking about it, as though I'm not allowed to disagree. Or say that "there's very little I can do about [your being offended]." Maybe don't make jokes like that in the first place? You write as if it's entirely my fault I was offended - when it's no more my fault I was offended than that I was abused. I wasn't the one who made a post trivialising being hit.

One in four women will suffer from domestic violence in their lifetime. Some are probably on this board. The DDR was undoubtedly horrible, but I doubt quite as many people who saw the effects of that will be posting here. So it's not exactly the world's most credible analogy, FYI.

But whatever. I'm not going to argue any more about this - you already clearly have your mind made up and it's not my job to teach morals to random people on the Internet. /adds to ignore list


----------



## Grandalf (Jun 7, 2014)

The real question should be WHY (insert type) would abuse their spouse. The obvious would be that they are unhealthy but what makes a type tick is important to acknowledge to maintain understanding in a marriage. I'm just going to go through why my type (INTJ) would abuse their spouse. My source is INTJ Personal Growth but feel free to list additional information :wink:

With that being said, INTJs....


May be unaware (and sometimes uncaring) of how they come across to others
May quickly dismiss input from others without really considering it
May apply their judgment more often towards others, rather than towards themselves
With their ability to see an issue from many sides, they may always find others at fault for problems in their own lives
May look at external ideas and people with the primary purpose of finding fault
May take pride in their ability to be critical and find fault in people and things
May have unrealistic and/or unreasonable expectations of others
May be intolerant of weaknesses in others
May believe that they're always right
May be cuttingly derisive and sarcastic towards others
May have an intense and quick temper
May hold grudges, and have difficulty forgiving people
May be wishy-washy and unsure how to act in situations that require
May have difficulty communicating their thoughts and feelings to others
May see so many tangents everywhere that they can't stay focused on the bottom line or the big picture

To sum up. INTJs may not emphasize others in a positive way when addressing or analyzing them. Anger may overtake them and make them unbearable in a relationship. Also, expectations vs reality could lead to hostility towards their partner partially due to inferior Se. 

Hope to have answered your question and expand your insight on INTJs


----------



## FourLeafCloafer (Aug 5, 2014)

Fleurelle said:


> As someone who's been through severe abuse, I didn't see your statement as making fun of the perpetrator so much as the actual victims of domestic violence. People being hit in the face and terrorised is not funny, and had you ever been through something like that, I doubt you would seriously come on here and make statements along the lines of "anything not worth joking about is not worth taking seriously". Or write an essay defending joking about it, as though I'm not allowed to disagree. Or say that "there's very little I can do about [your being offended]." Maybe don't make jokes like that in the first place?
> 
> One in four women will suffer from domestic violence in their lifetime. Some are probably on this board. The DDR was undoubtedly horrible, but I doubt too many people who saw the effects of that will be posting here. So it's not exactly the world's most credible analogy, FYI.
> 
> But whatever. I'm not going to argue any more about this - you already clearly have your mind made up and it's not my job to teach morals to random people on the Internet. /adds to ignore list


Of course you are allowed to disagree! It's a free world, after all. Every kind of joke might offend someone. I can't read peoples minds to see if they are going to be offended. I did say that I was sorry. 

And for your information, there are plenty of people who lived through the DDR in my vicinity, and I joke around them too, so that's where the analogy comes from. I make plenty of jokes on the expense of bullies, being bullied myself, and my whole family likes to make jokes referring to the most terrible time of our lives: when both of my parents almost died from an unknown illness. Maybe my sense of humour is a bit macabre. But I am not trying to make fun of you or anyone else who has been abused. I'm trying to bring some light to the world and call out the ridiculousness of typism in combination with domestic abuse. 

Ignore me if you want, but remember that the internet is a dark place. There's plenty of people who actually _want _to insult you.


----------

