# Ideal Matches and the harm from this idea



## Aelthwyn (Oct 27, 2010)

The idea that there is an ideal match, whether personality type related or not, is a dangerous fairy tale - and normally I'm one who's all for fairtyals and ideals and chasing dreams. Thinking that there will ever be a 'perfect' relationship that doesn't require work and personal sacrifice is... not understanding LOVE. Love isn't focused on its own desires and comfort - which is what keeping your eye out for a 'more perfect match' is - it's looking out for yourself. Of course some relationships are easier than others, but whenever there are two Different people, you're going to come across places where you clash, and a good relationship is working together through those clashes and Knowing how to Put the Other Person's Needs Before Your Own while still balancing this with Self-Care and Self-Respect. 

Personality theories Can give us general insights into probable issues that Could arise between people of certain types, or help us analyze issues that have arisen and help us understand each other's perspectives, but there are so many factors beyond personality that affect relationships between people that it is silly to think it can determine who is best for you specifically. 

Whenever looking at personality theories, whether you are considering it in regards to relationships or just personal understanding, it's important to give more weight to your actual, individual, personal experience rather than just taking everything as 'it must be true' and then viewing your life only through an interpretation that matches that. (I mean this is true of anytihng you read).


----------



## Llyralen (Sep 4, 2017)

Vexus said:


> I think it would be unwise to follow MBTI or personality descriptions, find value in it, and then not use it to qualify people who you might enter into a relationship with. If there's truth in the personality types - and there is definite truth there, because it's a pattern of behavior - then you can avoid certain behaviors, period. It's very simple in this way.
> 
> As an introvert, all the extroverts qualifying others based on a wide range of superficial values, I'm glad that I have a tool to counter all that and say that they disqualify due to valuing many of those superficial values.


I don’t think you read through the scenarios I wrote. 

This seems quite prejudiced and also incorrect. MBTI is Cognitive function, not exactly behavior. Two people of very different types can both act the same in a situation and people of the same type can act very differently. Specific values certainly aren’t MBTI-related. Much more culture-based and family-based and really probably individual-based. For instance, two people of two very different types can both highly value kindness, for instance OR two people of the same type can value kindness very differently.

Could you please try to explain your statement from above: “Extroverts qualify others based on a wide range of superficial values” ?


----------



## Vexus (Mar 23, 2020)

Llyralen said:


> I don’t think you read through the scenarios I wrote.


I did, but that's beside the point I am making, which is counter to your premise. I think "ideal matching" has a lot of value and not much harm.



Llyralen said:


> This seems quite prejudiced and also incorrect.


Prejudice comes from a place of truth.

Darn, missed your INFJ-specifics there before you edited it out. Yes, everyone is different.



Llyralen said:


> MBTI is Cognitive function, not exactly behavior.


There is correlation though. That's my point. And it's pretty definitive that many behaviors do apply to the vast majority of any specific type.



Llyralen said:


> Could you please try to explain your statement from above: “Extroverts qualify others based on a wide range of superficial values” ?


I'd have to point to some examples. One that I've been following recently has been ENTP-related. ENTP seem to also score similarly in enneagram with 7 being a dominant score. This type likes to try new things, and has a personality that is quick to start but then quickly moves on to something new; gets bored easily and doesn't like to be held down to things. In relationships, this can mean a lot of different partners - whomever suited their fancy at the time. The connection wasn't something about the personality of their partner, it was more about what they could enjoy in the short time frame before they moved on - superficial things in general. Attempting to explore the depths of a person isn't a common trait for this type unless they really connect or grow out of that nature.

And, I'm not saying just MBTI, but personality metrics of all sorts are applicable for filtering out potential problems.

For example, I find it a turn off when someone has a lot of sexual partners. It's a huge turn off; I want a deep connection, not just "the next" connection. If ENTPs on average are seeking out lots of relationships and having lots of sexual partners to try new things and be their extroverted selves (which I have no problem with, each type is different) I can basically not waste my time; if I know someone is an ENTP, in general, their method of always wanting to try new things, if it extends to relationships, is not going to sit well with me. I can just avoid that problem - on average - by not considering ENTPs for a relationship. I save myself a lot of inner turmoil trying to make sense of how their world works, and I save them a lot of turmoil trying to understand why I even care and if they should leave me or not over it.

It's a win-win situation here. It's just one example, but there are many others, for many different types.

If you know how a certain type works in general, you can avoid dealing with that. INFP for example like being told what to do. They just want someone to say "go do this thing" and they go do this thing. If you don't want to engage with someone in that manner in a relationship, then you can avoid this type. This is a broad generality and someone might say they're different; not the point. Another easy to apply example: let's say you'd rather be spending time with someone who enjoys the moment with you versus always taking photographs of the moment - INFP are the ones taking the photograph of the sunset (or lots of other things) instead of simply enjoying it with their partner _on average_. It's a trend among the type to do this. It's not bad, not at all, but if you want to avoid feeling like a secondary priority to the act of capturing the perfect picture that captures the feeling they are getting when they see something - which is super powerful and important to them - well, just don't involve yourself with INFPs. If you don't mind someone snapping photos all the time, then it's not a big deal, and you can in effect choose to deal with it or not in this way.

It's about being able to pick the things that might line up with your values, easier. If a certain type prioritizes certain things and you do not, it's a conflict you can avoid.

Highly sensory-experience types conflict with my inferior Se. So hanging out with a type that generally is into high-volume sensory experiences, I can avoid that and look for people who also share this, or balance me out in a different way. I get along really well with INTJs as long as nothing emotional is discussed, since we like to do the same dominant thing, and avoid the same inferior thing. This seems pretty good, and the problems we might face in a relationship are probably more to my liking.

This probably is more work than most people are willing to put into things, so it's not for everyone. ENTP for example couldn't be bothered to consider these things for the most part. They'll just try different things until they've found something they really like. But for those who think there's some value in not wasting their time, why not filter based on an ideal type or close to it? If your ideal Friday night is to go out to a club and dance and drink and get drunk, that's not representative of a lot of types in terms of their sensory function. Everyone is different, but it will help you avoid things that might conflict with who you are if you pay attention.

Want to get analyzed and inspected and have someone poke at your inner self? Find an INFJ - their Ni/Ti generally makes them really dig into who you are. Want to not have someone so concerned with these things? Find some other type.

When you browse these forums, you see a lot of patterns in types. Thousands of people who agree with the same thing, and express a feeling of belonging when someone of their same type "gets them." (note, very little extroverted activity relative to introverted) Extending this pattern to relationships and anywhere else makes a lot of sense. If you want someone to start off a project the right way, get an ENTP, but don't keep them on the project for too long or they will get bored. So it can apply to work relationships as well; an older family member who was in high ranking government positions took MBTI a long time ago and his position was redirected towards his interests from that. Like a long time ago. And he loved it (and is ENTP). So the value in doing this kind of filtering and prioritizing is there. It's just learning how to use it, and obviously not treating people poorly or just completely discounting everyone simply because - which is where there can be harm. Instead, if I know a specific type is unlikely to align with my values, maybe they just stay friends. No harm in that.


----------



## Llyralen (Sep 4, 2017)

Vexus said:


> I did, but that's beside the point I am making, which is counter to your premise. I think "ideal matching" has a lot of value and not much harm.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I guess I’ve said it before to you. You think you know, and you don’t. Your thoughts on INFPs are so off as to make me think you’ve never met one. And you’re scattering your prejudiced ideas around where I can see the possible damage. 

I think you better be my second “ignore.”


----------



## 8080 (Oct 6, 2020)

Vexus said:


> If you know how a certain type works in general, you can avoid dealing with that. *INFP* for example like being told what to do. *They just want someone to say "go do this thing" and they go do this thing*. If you don't want to engage with someone in that manner in a relationship, then you can avoid this type.


What can one say to such nonsense? *INFPs*, of all people, are supposed to wait for orders? That is as absurd as the assumption that INTPs wait for orders. Even more absurd is the assumption that the two most independent (I+N+P) of the 16 types are thirsting to execute any commands. 



> Another easy to apply example: let's say you'd rather be spending time with someone who enjoys the moment with you versus always taking photographs of the moment - *INFP are the ones taking the photograph of the sunset (or lots of other things)* instead of simply enjoying it with their partner _*on average*_. *It's a trend among the type to do this*. It's not bad, not at all, but if you want to avoid feeling like a secondary priority to the act of capturing the perfect picture that captures the feeling they are getting when they see something - which is super powerful and important to them - well, *just don't involve yourself with INFPs*. If you don't mind someone snapping photos all the time, then it's not a big deal, and you can in effect choose to deal with it or not in this way.


That is completely new to me. Which study are you referring to? What do you think these infamous INFP photographers were thinking? Perhaps "She is not as _deep deep deep_ as she _always_ claims, just a teacher without an audience?" Do these INFP photos of sunsets and leftovers on plates bear witness to suicidal INFP desperation, and will they most likely be used against them at the next opportunity to prove how shallow they are?

If you need advice on the most convenient way to protect yourself from kissing a kissable *ENTP* surface without being married for at least 25 years after that first kiss, you should always present yourself from the very beginning as the GRANDMOTHER type (like GRAND TOUR and GRAND HOTEL). ENTPs will know what to do right away. Unless they have a soft spot for GRANDMILFs, of course.


----------



## Clare_Bare (Apr 6, 2015)

Vexus said:


> If ENTPs on average are seeking out lots of relationships and having lots of sexual partners to try new things and be their extroverted selves (which I have no problem with, each type is different) I can basically not waste my time;
> If I know someone is an ENTP, in general, their method of always wanting to try new things, if it extends to relationships, is not going to sit well with me. I can just avoid that problem - on average - by not considering ENTPs for a relationship.


I must be the most atypical ENTP on the planet!
Sexual lifestyle? Highly sexual and playing the field? Not me at all.
Relationships? I have high awareness of, and are, totally committed to my partner - what's good for us both is my approach to love.

It's obvious your interpretation of ENTP's and other types is based on _excessive_ stereotyping.
Most people sit in the 'middle' of their type expressions rather than at the extreme boundaries.


----------



## Llyralen (Sep 4, 2017)

Clare_Bare said:


> I must be the most atypical ENTP on the planet!
> Sexual lifestyle? Highly sexual and playing the field? Not me at all.
> Relationships? I have high awareness of, and are, totally committed to my partner - what's good for us both is my approach to love.
> 
> ...


I meant to defend ENTPs by summoning some of you because I hardly knew where to start unpicking the elaborate mis-information and prejudice. Glad you’re here. 

I’m really not going to put up with type prejudice anymore. Man have I ever heard the most illogical tripe about extroverts at times on PerC. Stuff that makes no sense at all. So interesting and shows such lack of awareness, but no more. I don’t think we should put up with it. Thank you for speaking out.


----------



## Vexus (Mar 23, 2020)

Clare_Bare said:


> It's obvious your interpretation of ENTP's and other types is based on _excessive_ stereotyping.


That's kind of the point? Your one-off personal self-anecdote about being different is completely irrelevant. It does not make anything obvious.

The point is stereotypes are useful in a broad sense, though not necessary to apply in an individual sense. I can avoid potential issues, for example the way you react, by just... not dealing with your type. I know, on average, other types will dig in to the topic even if it conflicts with their own personal experience.

Edit:


Clare_Bare said:


> I must be the most atypical ENTP on the planet!


Just look at the forum post distribution and hopefully you can see that yes, you are extremely atypical if you're regularly posting on these forums as an extrovert. If you need concrete proof, do the math on the percentage of introvert posts vs. extrovert posts. And then do your type compared to the whole. It's staggering how much of an outlier any extrovert is if they spend much time here. Which is probably why there is a negative reaction. I don't know for sure, but hopefully the hard math on that will be of some use in making some sense about what I'm saying; there are patterns, and if you want to avoid someone who likes chatting on internet personality forums, avoid introverts!



8080 said:


> What can one say to such nonsense? INFPs, of all people, are supposed to wait for orders? That is as absurd as the assumption that INTPs wait for orders. Even more absurd is the assumption that the two most independent (I+N+P) of the 16 types are thirsting to execute any commands.


That wasn't stated, but that doesn't stop people from injecting their own interpretation into things and confusing themselves and others. I don't know where INTPs entered the chat, but whatever, you do you. I'm not saying INFP wait for orders, and did not say they wait for orders, but somehow you're able to generate this claim from within your perception of my words and create a position against an invisible framework which you can then attack. I'm saying they prefer, on average, to have a clear directive so they don't have to use inferior Te too much to think about things; they like being told what to do - not that they wait for orders, but again, prefer situations where they're told what to do. They like situations where the expectation of them is clear, like a workplace where they are told, "This is exactly what needs to be done step by step to do your job." There are always outliers, but inferior Te is the driver behind this if you want to read about it. They are more stressed out when they're not told what to do and have to improvise, fearing making a mistake or not doing the right thing.

I didn't read the rest, it got too scatterbrained. And as always, nothing applies to all. Everyone is different. But if you're needing a think-on-their-feet person as a project-manager who can dynamically manage a bunch of people and change direction on a whim, an INFP might not be fit for that role and would get stressed out. And then, again, there will be one who is just fine at it. That's not the point; the stereotypes have some value as-is.


----------



## ENFPathetic (Apr 3, 2018)

This is no different than people who think your star sign is more important than your character. Some people are just dumb.


----------



## Ewok City (Sep 21, 2020)

Whoa, easy with the flaming. While I'm happy that the OP is speaking up on behalf of INFPs, I think this is just a case of misinterpretation of @Vexus' statement. As an INFP, let me clarify some points. Hope it could solve some misunderstandings here! 



Vexus said:


> INFP for example like being told what to do. They just want someone to say "go do this thing" and they go do this thing.


Just like some people have mentioned, I-N-P combinations most often result in someone who are extremely independent. They definitely do not like being ordered. But when the INFP is confused and they need directions, they would really appreciate it if someone could provide them with some insights, preferably coming from their own personal experience that has been proven to work (this point is not a must). But on a daily basis? I don't think INFP would want to let others to make decisions for them forever.

So, I'd disagree with @Vexus' way of expressing this point, but I get his idea. I don't think he is demeaning INFPs in any way, it's just that the way that it's phrased might have misled people in believing so.

The same goes for his description of other types. I think there's so much underlying information and facts that could have been expressed to avoid this misunderstanding. *But if we were to lay out every single one of them each time we want to make a point, imagine how long every posts here would be!* I'm sure nobody here would want to read essays everyday.

Anyways, I believe his main point is that certain types do have some tendencies toward certain behaviors. Though it's not always the case, but we can't completely refute that there is indeed a higher chance of that to happen. Of course, there will always be deviations in statistics, but some people might want to play safe and prefer to just stick with the stereotypes, to save time or for whatever reasons. 

This is the reason why the Chinese people would rather their kids learn English with a Russian with heavy accent, rather than a Canadian-born Chinese with fluent British accent. Well I'd say, too bad for them, they're missing out. Same for those who choose to stick with the MBTI stereotypes.


----------



## Llyralen (Sep 4, 2017)

Ewok City said:


> Whoa, easy with the flaming. While I'm happy that the OP is speaking up on behalf of INFPs, I think this is just a case of misinterpretation of @Vexus' statement. As an INFP, let me clarify some points. Hope it could solve some misunderstandings here!
> 
> 
> Just like some people have mentioned, I-N-P combinations most often result in someone who are extremely independent. They definitely do not like being ordered. But when the INFP is confused and they need directions, they would really appreciate it if someone could provide them with some insights, preferably coming from their own personal experience that has been proven to work (this point is not a must). But on a daily basis? I don't think INFP would want to let others to make decisions for them forever.
> ...


So, main point aside (which I disagree with when people don’t understand people well, because then it becomes ridiculous and prejudiced based on nothing), am I supposed to let it slide when someone says something like: 
“Extroverts qualify people based on a wide criteria of shallow values.” 

Hmm, let’s say that I didn’t read the part where he also disqualified ENTPs from his dating pool with the logic from his above statement and lets say that I decide shallow is a neutral word here, then it’s still really messed up due to not understanding and looking more deeply into someone’s criteria to understand their methods as valuable and understand why their methods work for them and also overcome prejudice. 

Basically sometimes people use MBTI for the opposite of what it is meant to be used for. It is using MBTI to dismiss assume and undervalue others rather than used to appreciate and ask deeper questions and hold off on assumptions until you can ask people and understand more. 

I’m sick of being dismissed for being an Extrovert myself and I’ve heard the most faulty logic used— not just on this thread— to do so. I have heard such crazy stuff as Extroverts are the ones who will get everyone infected with CoViD. I’ve heard that extroverts (not in this thread) are unintelligent, unthoughtful, etc. Now I hear shallow values? For Ne dom? From a type whose hierarchy of values should be the same as mine? I am just plain sick of the prejudice. I think people need to go back to basics. MBTI practitioners always teach the equality of all of our polarities, and also teach the incorrect assumptions that can arise as incorrect assumptions. I think we need to go back there. A lot of people think they can understand all of this without even a wide sample size of type to study and without really discussing things. 

My main problem here is that I can easily see the possible consequences of all this poor information and shut possibilities for ENFPs are the thing we hate the most.


----------



## Vexus (Mar 23, 2020)

Llyralen said:


> Hmm, let’s say that I didn’t read the part where he also disqualified ENTPs from his dating pool with the logic from his above statement and lets say that I decide shallow is a neutral word here, then it’s still really messed up due to not understanding and looking more deeply into someone’s criteria to understand their methods as valuable and understand why their methods work for them and also overcome prejudice.


But me disqualifying ENTPs is not an attack on you, or any ENTP. It's doing us both a favor 

If I made a claim that all ENTPs are bisexual, who cares? It's not an attack on you unless you take offense to being called bisexual. If it's false as it applies to you, then great. If you think it's false regarding your entire type, then why are you trying to personally defend millions of people? A simple, "I think you're wrong on this, mainly because I'm not this way," is enough. There is no hard evidence of any of this, nor will such evidence likely ever be found, so it's all just opinion. There's a chance I am just shooting myself in the foot; if you care about me and don't want me to suffer, then it makes sense, but if you don't care about me, leave me to my misery of avoiding certain types.

I use type information to better help me relate and understand other people. It has eliminated prejudice and allows me to see where someone is coming from and why they have their perspective, rather than just thinking, "This person is an idiot," which was normal for me beforehand.

At the same time, looking into someone's criteria and methods, if those criteria and methods are generally going to be unfavorable to your own internal values, seems like a waste of time when considering a romantic relationship. Again, on average. Another aspect to this, is even though I can say I will try and filter an ENTP from a relationship, it's very possible that I don't adhere to this; it's not as set in stone as I make it, and I don't think it is for anyone. It's more a guiding idea for saving time, since values will be different, or the methods for dealing with problems will be different, and if those clash with how I deal with things, that kind of problem can be avoided.... on average.



Llyralen said:


> Basically sometimes people use MBTI for the opposite of what it is meant to be used for. It is using MBTI to dismiss assume and undervalue others rather than used to appreciate and ask deeper questions and hold off on assumptions until you can ask people and understand more.


There's someone posting about how they exclusively want to use MBTI to obtain sex. I don't think they're wrong in using MBTI in any way shape or form that they want. "Meant" to be used for is entirely subjective.

I'd definitely ask more in-depth questions to an individual, but I'm not going to look for an ENTP out of the crowd (and to be fair, ENTP aren't the ones I really disqualify, it's more the high extroverted sensors, which I'll link another thread in a moment which is "interesting" (not fact)). So if I meet an ENTP or if one reaches out to me and wants to talk, they're an individual, and worth all my time and effort getting to know them. But if I'm looking for someone, why not avoid the poor odds that certain problems are dealt with in a favorable way?

If you've ever told someone in a relationship, "Look you're too much, you're kind of annoying me right now, I think we need time apart," - if this correlates to a type, it's not a type I would enjoy being with, if that were ever said to me.



Llyralen said:


> I am just plain sick of the prejudice.


And yet, you're in an introverted space when seeing this prejudice, right? This is really interesting. Go on any dating app, and what do you see? Extroverted prejudice based on the sensory world. I initially had the same feeling of being sick of the prejudice - how can I "swipe no" on someone when I don't know who they are? But other types can make that call based on their shallow understanding of someone. And to be fair, any type _can_ and will and so on, but it feels wrong for some reason. So, if my feeling of it being wrong is not just me (as I had always thought) and is instead more aligned with personality, then there are others like me who feel it's wrong, and those people I might get along with better in a relationship. If you think casual sex is fine, and I do not, we're going to have a rift in our relationship, period. And if that extends to types in general, then saving ourselves the headache of the inevitable argument sounds fine to me.

This link below is a thread someone posted, making some completely unscientific claims about types and their willingness to engage in casual sex. I think it's fun to look at because it's in effect a representation of my own intuition. Even if it's wrong or whatever is irrelevant. It has some value to it regardless. And if it has any bearing on anything, ENTP seem alright 









MBTI and openness to having sex with any person within...


Outdated. Snip.




www.personalitycafe.com


----------



## tarmonk (Nov 21, 2017)

Llyralen said:


> Question: Do we truly see others as individuals beyond type?


It's a hard question. I can tell that during a few recent years when I've been into typology theories, it started to create some stereotypes for me how I see people. But now when I've decided I initially always mistyped myself, I'm much more sceptical about trying to see their types instead of actual person behind it.



> Question: Do we get too mixed up in whatever anyone is saying about ideal pairings?


Since my recent findings I've got about myself, I don't think any more there are ideal pairings but I have my own hypothetical theory but I unfortunately don't have enough facts to back it up. Will try to explain it under question 3.



> Question: What have you experienced? What have you seen?


Earlier I saw myself as ENFP and my partner as INFJ and it seemed to work well so I believed there seems to be some truth behind this type match thing. But now I've finally found that we both were most likely mistyped so it doesn't apply any more  It doesn't of course change anything how we see each other and get along - it just helps to understand each other even better.

My best understanding about myself right now is that I'm some STJ and more likely my current partner is INTJ not INFJ - her feelings and emotions are very inwardly oriented so it's not easy to see them, she couldn't even express them more than I could about my own feelings and her probably very good communication and people skills she has learned with experience, initially misled me to think it's Fe. She works with people but it appeared she just arranges them and solves their issues but isn't actually emotionally involved at all. This combination works well for us and I can see even some similarities with each other considering judgement styles we mostly use. My ex for 15 years was most likely ESFJ and I can now more clearly see reasons behind repeating conflicts we had those times.

I got just a hypothetical thought after those recent revelations - what if perception doesn't play role in a good match but judgement styles do affect it? From my own exp, I had particular troubles with strong Fe (ESFJ) while she sometimes saw me as a cold uncaring bastard - although I'm just bad in providing enough confirmation and affirmation she needed - it's just not my cup of tea. On the other hand I never understood why she needed to become so irrational and emotion-driven while arguing or having a conflict. Seems that judgements/decisions just were too different for us. And right now we don't have any of those issues with my current partner as our judgement styles seem quite similar. Also our need for displaying emotions, speaking nice words and compliments and getting confirmation/affirmation is quite equally low for both of us.

I don't have enough different observations to tell from my own experiences if there's truth behind my hypothesis as I've been in only 2 long relationships for whole recent 20 years but what do you think?


----------



## Meliodas (Nov 16, 2016)

While I find it hard to pinpoint one specific factor that draws me to a woman, there are certainly patterns to be found in the kind of people who I've attracted and repelled in the past. I think everyone probably has an archetype that they're looking for in a mate, even if they're not consciously aware of it.

When I think of an "ideal" relationship scenario, I imagine the conversation between Origami Tobiichi and the protagonist Shido early on in the anime _Date A Live_. While as a fictional character, many of Origami's traits are exaggerated to create a kuudere archetype, I am fascinated by the juxtaposition between her calm and dispassionate demeanor, her brevity in conversations and her rather possessive (and perverted) sexual behaviour. I would love to provoke and coax some amusing response out of a girl like this.


Transcript of the dialogue:

Shido: I watch you all the time during class.

Origami: Me too.

Shido: Not only that, but I also sniff your gym clothes after school.

Origami: Me too.

Shido: R-really...I guess we have a lot in common...

Origami: Yeah.


More mature examples of this type in fiction might be Jill Valentine from _Resident Evil_, or the goddess Athena from Homer's _Odyssey_.


----------



## Llyralen (Sep 4, 2017)

Do we wonder why this


Meliodas said:


> While I find it hard to pinpoint one specific factor that draws me to a woman, there are certainly patterns to be found in the kind of people who I've attracted and repelled in the past. I think everyone probably has an archetype that they're looking for in a mate, even if they're not consciously aware of it.
> 
> When I think of an "ideal" relationship scenario, I imagine the conversation between Origami Tobiichi and the protagonist Shido early on in the anime _Date A Live_. While as a fictional character, many of Origami's traits are exaggerated to create a kuudere archetype, I am fascinated by the juxtaposition between her calm and dispassionate demeanor, her brevity in conversations and her rather possessive (and perverted) sexual behaviour. I would love to provoke and coax some amusing response out of a girl like this.
> 
> ...


Not exactly what this thread is about, but getting some super-specific experiences expectations without much experience of what makes a relationship actually work might not work too well for people either.


----------



## Windblownhair (Aug 12, 2013)

Llyralen said:


> Question: Do we truly see others as individuals beyond type?
> 
> Question: Do we get too mixed up in whatever anyone is saying about ideal pairings?
> 
> Question: What have you experienced? What have you seen?


I’ve definitely seen the “There are a million red flags but I’m going to ignore it because our pairing is ideal!”philosophy play out a few times. I don’t know how much MBTI is to blame. While the person is using it as justification, they have seemed like the type to enter red flag relationships anyway…MBTI just happens to be their current justification.

Hypothetical pairings (and especially the data behind the pairings) are fascinating! I don’t think there are enough large studies out there to give super solid data. But the data I have seen doesn’t really back up the ‘golden type’ descriptions.

Putting out my own theories is a bit of a mine field, since there is always someone ready to be offended.🤷‍♀️I know full well it’s based on my own personal experience and observations, but there are patterns out there to be recognized.

As far as my personal experience, my marriage was already in existence and happy before MBTI came out to play. So I’ve been able to use it to flesh out certain thought processes and have a common vocabulary to discuss them. I don’t know how much of a challenge it would have been to do that without a pre-built base.


----------



## Pyrite (Apr 23, 2021)

Give human beings a hammer and nails, and they'll drive them through their skulls every time.


----------



## WraithOfNightmare (Jun 20, 2019)

I’m only speaking from an INFP perspective, it may or may not hold true for the other NF types to varying degrees. If it doesn’t then all the better.

This won’t sound the best, but over time I’ve come to realize that despite all the good traits we have / think we have, that the fact is we aren’t exactly sought after as life partners by a majority of the people in this current world. INFP guys pretty much run opposite the stereotype of what the “mainstream” expects out of our gender, and while I’m sure that INFP gals can / are often shy and demure and “feminine” as the mainstream expects, all of it is concealing lots of depth and intensity that will surprise or even put many off once it starts to be revealed.

We aren’t made for this world, whether fully partaking in its joys and vanities or doing what’s expected of us in this often cruel, emotionless, and ultra-realistic society. We die on the inside if forced to insert ourselves in the latter, but when it comes to the former we’re not exactly the bundles of (worldly) happiness that some other types can be. Take me for example, if someone came to me with a problem I’ll be likely to delve deeply into it for them and make shit 10x more depressing before giving them anything positive / reassuring. Some other types will go straight to showering you with their cheerfulness and optimism but not us. It’s in our nature to go deep into, and really try to decode what hurts us in this world and we do the same for the people we care about.

We are the diamond in the rough, the little light in the midst of a great darkness, but the vast majority of people around us are still more than happy to be dancing in the dark / getting themselves roughed up for all its joys, sorrows and insanity, figuratively speaking. It takes a special kind of heart and soul to look beyond it.

I think it takes a special kind of person who’s not only open-minded enough, but likely having a degree of world-weariness in him / herself that will put in the time and energy to look for someone like us. Contrary to what we may think of ourselves, we are actually VERY high maintenance / high investment due to the deeper level of exchange, connection, and understanding that we so deeply crave. Not many folks out there even have the capacity for that, or even if they have a little it’s likely they’ll get tired by us because this is our primary mode of living.

An INFP (again, may or may not be true for other NF types) in this utterly broken world ideally needs a balance of traits in a life partner that isn’t always easy to find. They’ve got to be someone who is sensitive and responds to many things / sees many things in a way that’s similar to yet complements that of the INFP, someone who understands and shares the INFP’s insightful and introspective nature and like I said, probably with a degree of world-weariness him / herself, but at the same time, is still able to handle making the sacrifices needed to attain some semblance of happiness in this world, ones that the INFP is hesitant / completely unable or unwilling to make. The INFP very much needs to feel reassured, but also protected from the wind and rain. I’m not saying we can’t handle any adversity but it’s really something that kills us from the inside over a period of time.

Speaking in purely practical / materialistic terms, it dawned on me today that although we’re about as far from being materialistic as one could possibly me (not to say we don’t enjoy some nice stuff every once in a while or don’t spend on say a hobby or something like that, I personally prefer experiences over things, cliche yes I know), the crushing realization of what it takes to survive in this unbalanced and heartless world means that in practice, for the partner of the INFP, we can actually be, in a way, more financially “demanding” than we appear and that we would benefit greatly from a more established financial arrangement (in whatever way) where we can best use our good qualities while being protected from physical deprivation and other hard consequences. Again of course it’s not that we are materialistic ourselves, it’s just that we need more protection from the brutality of this world than many other types. Of course, in an ideal state of things, we’d be unstoppable (in a good way).

Our ability to adapt is less so than say, an ENTP, or maybe even ENFPs. While we all share Ne, our dominant function is Fi, and combined with that Fi-Si loop it can be hard for us to remain truly open-minded to new ways of engaging because it’s all filtered through our personal values which are then reinforced and put into a loop of determining what makes us happy and not, what we like and dislike for future reference when we look into the past (Si). It’s also very hard for us, being N types, to really “live in the moment” despite me always saying I should be doing more of that. 

I feel we’re vastly unappreciated and will continue to be this way until there are sweeping, fundamental changes to how people think of life. Until then, we can only pick up one scrap at a time and do what we can to hopefully make the world a slightly better place. And if someone decides to take us along for the ride, and does so with understanding and appreciation, even admiration, that would be great.

I know I very much want to get married and start a family, and that I won’t be raising my kids to be the way I’d hate to be myself / force them to do what I’d hate to do myself.


----------



## WraithOfNightmare (Jun 20, 2019)

And I also feel that just the fact how I can often put stuff into writing better than talking a lot of times already makes me feel a bit handicapped when engaging the wider world. What matters in this world is how you can get your point across in a manner that’s as understandable and time savvy as possible, people usually don’t want to hear or make time for anything more than that. Everything can be commodified, everything can be analyzed / stripped of its inherent value. I wouldn’t want to marry someone who agrees with and goes with this kind of flow.


----------



## WraithOfNightmare (Jun 20, 2019)

And there are times where I ask myself, how the heck can people find any sort or semblance of genuine happiness in this mess? Is it really “happiness”, or just bursts of satisfaction with varying degrees of length and intensity? Is it even “contentment” or an attitude of resignation towards wishing / looking for something better and more genuine?

Of course there’s the old saying that one should focus on what they can change and not think too much about what they cannot, but then I feel that’s easy to do when you either don’t even feel any sense of loss over the bad things that you can’t control / make better, or even agree with and take part in the things that makes this world the way it is.


----------



## Mark R (Dec 23, 2015)

UpClosePersonal said:


> I rarely knew someone's MBTI type because most people don't know that IRL. But in the case of the few MBTI types I was aware of, it was only a way to understand the why of what they do and not whether or not it impacted our getting along.


I think certain data would support that personality types do make a big difference in relationships. Identical twins are far from random in personality types relative to one another. You will see very common patterns between the twins. You will also see certain patterns as children are added to a family. The happiest relationships also share their pairings with the community. There is a surprising amount of agreement in the community as far as what works best.

Still, this needs to be balanced with other factors. Culture, religion, values, maturity, genetics, and other factors are important too. Too much reliance on "the perfect MBTI pair" creates a big set of problems. Two people of any type can have successful relationships. No one should leave a happy and functional relationship to find a more recommended type.

Add your family to my survey thread.


----------



## WraithOfNightmare (Jun 20, 2019)

This isn’t entirely related to type, more in a general sense, but for a long time, and even to some degree now, as an INFP male I‘ve often found it much easier to build close relationships, even platonic ones, with females than other males. Even with most of my better guy friends today, I can’t really get into all the feely-touchy stuff with them and I still feel like they don’t completely “get” me and the way I am, with the exception of one (he’s a significantly older guy and the artsy type himself). He’s also likely the only F type (INFJ) among my guy friends. There’s another one I’m pretty close to although we don’t talk as much since he married (and isn’t doing too well, long story involving some unfortunate circumstances and bad people in his life), we still get along though.

I don’t want to generalize too much, but there is a certain segment of guys that definitely aren’t rare (and some of the more extreme ones are growing in numbers), who adhere to very outdated notions of “masculinity” and “conservative values.” Two of my friends that I think are most likely xSTJ (one of them might be ISTP, one is definitely xSTJ) I’ve had to distance myself from because I simply cannot relate to a lot of things they say. They tend to hold some pretty repugnant, militaristic, even borderline fascist views. They see the world as a strict competition between the strong and the weak, and want the “good old days” where people, to them, still believed in notions of “duty” and “honor” or “just did their job.” One of them is a year younger than me and the other’s a couple years older, so we’re in the same age group generally speaking.

I’ve had to distance myself from them and I try not to talk about anything too freely or emotional with them. I’ve grown more and more hesitant with even sharing my views on an intellectual level with them. They haven’t coerced me into anything, and it’s very unfortunate because I’ve known them for years, but I feel like I just can’t bear to bring myself to associate with them closely even though there’s still SOME stuff we agree on that could be considered conventional / traditional / whatever you want to call it. One of them’s joined the Canadian military in a combat role and seems to be loving it. He’s always had that militaristic streak in him and used to complain to me regularly about “liberals” and “weaklings” when we were both in Vancouver.

They’re not entirely bad people, even now, but their approach to many things does unsettle me and I do foresee significant issues in their future relationships and marriage if they are so keen on the idea of being “the man.”

I also feel I’m just too sensitive to a lot of guys, or maybe just give off the wrong “vibe” that makes them feel I’m not “one of them” for whatever reason. Perhaps it’s the way I talk, the way I am, or even the way I write? I don’t know. A lot of my attempts to start friendships with guys that seemed friendly at first ended up as false starts / false positives. It ended up being that they were just opportunistically looking for a chat buddy and someone to share time with in a specific time and place, with no intention of taking the friendship to a greater level. This has made me a lot more skeptical about people.

Women aren’t saints. If you want to know how / why I know? I grew up with an unstable single parent (mom) and gossipy female relatives that made fun of me. And I’ve probably met almost as many crazies among the opposite sex.

However, for all the imperfections of my upbringing, I think it’s given me more sympathy and sensitivity towards women’s issues than a lot of guys around me, including my younger and middle-aged friends. I feel that a lot of my psyche, my instincts are feminine. I see no shame and distinction in doing “guy stuff” and “girl stuff”, with certain limits, of course, but I see nothing wrong whatsoever with carrying a purse, or even going to get lingerie or other “girly stuff.” I’ve never really seen women, at least not to any noticeable degree, as the mythical “other”, growing up they were there, I got along with some of them, and that was it.

I come from an East Asian culture and Confucianism traditionally upholds notions of patriarchy. However, the region my family comes from was traditionally fairly isolated from Han Chinese influence, where ethnic minorities (including some matriarchal ones) had lots of influence. I grew up around and being accustomed to women who made decisions, that as I got older and got exposed to more and more “guy stuff” and men calling the shots, it was like being a tourist on another planet and a shock to my system. 

In school the male teachers I got (this was in Canada) also tended to be pretty bookish and soft spoken. 

In our culture (or regional sub-culture) there’s a saying that to raise a boy like a girl is a blessing, because it gives him a sense of compassion and knowing how to care for people. One of our superstitions goes that a guy with a somewhat soft / feminine looking face is a sign of good luck. Don’t know the specifics.

Looking back I’m very grateful to have grown up in this sort of culture, despite the imperfections and sometimes challenges of my personal situation. Seeing how my dad tried to assert his machismo and playing out his insecurities over being a good dad and a good husband really killed any fondness I could have developed for the “traditional” notions of being a guy. It’s the main reason why I won’t reconnect with him. 

I see no inherent difference in the “dad role” and “mom role” for my future kid / s. Other than giving a guy’s perspective on certain issues (say, when my future daughter starts to show interest in boys), I believe in looking after my kid / s, and I wouldn’t hesitate to do what their mom does just because I’m their dad and just because I have a “male role” to play. And you know what? At the end of the day, I guess nice guys do finish first after all. If a girl wants a “traditional man” and if a guy wants a “traditional wife”, that’s okay. They do theirs and I’ll do mine. Just don’t think there is one single model, and worst yet, don’t impose their antiquated notions onto me. I will love my family my way and it’s our happiness over someone else’s.

I find that even with most of my better male friends, I can tell them what I THINK but I can’t always tell them fully how I FEEL. Even if they get what I THINK, it takes a whole lot longer for them to understand the magnitude of how I FEEL over a given issue. With women, even if they don’t fully understand what I THINK (because I can be a big nerd), I find, even now, that there’s much more potential for emotional bonding and sympathy over how I FEEL. I’ve had to cut out all my female friends / acquaintances because I’m in a committed relationship (after some hesitation) that I really hope will lead to marriage and a family. A lot this is still true today.

I find that I can simply be more of myself around a greater portion of women, compared to other men. I feel less judged and more accepted.

Knowing that there are still those who care about me and look after me has made me feel much better about myself. I’m objectively not bad looking either, just on the geeky side. 


And I’ll definitely teach my future daughter to have a good sense of self-esteem and not fall for the kind of jerk that my dad was, or the ones some of my friends could end up becoming if they don’t reflect on their beliefs.


----------



## WraithOfNightmare (Jun 20, 2019)

This should serve as a warning to guys out there, especially younger ones. There was a time when I got (unfortunately) involved with certain alternative right / far-right communities that would have destroyed me and any chances at having healthy relationships had I continued down that path. They were disguised as other forums, and the teenage me was lonely and wanted a sense of identity. What really drew me in was the feeling of being treated like an adult, which I didn’t really get at home. Eventually, the shaming and bullying began in order to get me to conform to their extremely warped ideas of society and gender roles. Deep down I knew I didn’t really believe in them on a fundamental level, but it was this very misplaced sense of identity and need for belonging that kept me entangled for longer than I should have. Some of them had overt or downright racist undertones too, but ironically a couple of the members who belonged to minorities turned out to be extremely obnoxious.

Their allure’s very concerning. Looking back I was also drawn to them because they were a “community of men” that was such a foreign yet intriguing concept to me, even having grown up under a relatively “matriarchal” set of practices that kept me safe and away from trouble despite the bad eggs.


----------



## tarmonk (Nov 21, 2017)

WraithOfNightmare said:


> This isn’t entirely related to type, more in a general sense, but for a long time, and even to some degree now, as an INFP male I‘ve often found it much easier to build close relationships, even platonic ones, with females than other males. Even with most of my better guy friends today, I can’t really get into all the feely-touchy stuff with them and I still feel like they don’t completely “get” me and the way I am, with the exception of one (he’s a significantly older guy and the artsy type himself). He’s also likely the only F type (INFJ) among my guy friends.


I think it may be more about F/T difference not that much about gender - as I understand your male friends are mostly T and it's known that Ts usually don't process their feel-touch side that much. I'm in relationship with T girl and she doesn't seem to process that side more than I do by myself (read: almost don't) but it's fine by me and we have a lot of other topics to cover instead 



> I don’t want to generalize too much, but there is a certain segment of guys that definitely aren’t rare (and some of the more extreme ones are growing in numbers), who adhere to very outdated notions of “masculinity” and “conservative values.” Two of my friends that I think are most likely xSTJ (one of them might be ISTP, one is definitely xSTJ) I’ve had to distance myself from because I simply cannot relate to a lot of things they say. They tend to hold some pretty repugnant, militaristic, even borderline fascist views. They see the world as a strict competition between the strong and the weak, and want the “good old days” where people, to them, still believed in notions of “duty” and “honor” or “just did their job.”


This might be too about their personal preferences and background more than about type/gender I guess. I'm male too and consider myself STJ but I don't have those interests at all (military, politics, views about "typical" masculinity and other "boring" topics so on). Contrary to you, my few closer friends are all male and I've never had female friends - it's more like I don't find many common topics with them. On the other hand it's again less about gender difference, more about that finding new people with common interests and background regardless of their gender isn't that easy task. 



> However, for all the imperfections of my upbringing, I think it’s given me more sympathy and sensitivity towards women’s issues than a lot of guys around me, including my younger and middle-aged friends. I feel that a lot of my psyche, my instincts are feminine. I see no shame and distinction in doing “guy stuff” and “girl stuff”, with certain limits, of course, but I see nothing wrong whatsoever with carrying a purse, or even going to get lingerie or other “girly stuff.”


Naah, this doesn't mean being "feminine" as a guy - in my opinion it's vice versa - confident men aren't afraid of such things and see no threat to their identity or manhood in that!


----------



## ciel sos infel (12 mo ago)

Llyralen said:


> I can think of many problems believing in an ideal match can create.
> 
> 1. I am in a long-term relationship with someone wonderful, the relationship is rewarding and beneficial—but they aren’t the “right” type— so it must be doomed? I should break up right? Their type is supposed to be scary at some point, right? My ideal awaits out there? I should break up.
> 
> ...


Perhaps people who are married shouldn't be troubling themselves with matters of a perfect relationship in the first place and instead focus on improving their marriage. Perhaps people who's marriages are doing alright aren't even interested in information like that aside from curiosity. Perhaps if something someone said or wrote is enough for them to give up on marriage they shouldn't have married anyone in the first place because they're not mature enough for a decision like that. Perhaps people who are already thinking about abandoning the ship are only fishing for an excuse and it's not the fault of what someone else has said.

People who aren't married though should have the right to make an informed decision, even if the relationship seems 'solid', because marriage is supposed to last a lifetime. Some issues are only visible later but they can be evaded through understanding of how cognitive functions interplay with each other. I could've been spared a trauma that took far too many years out of my life if I understood what I now understand - but nobody taught me anything of the sort, because love is magic which cannot be understood and we're all so different and individual. You know Schopenhauer also noticed how people tend to marry people who they wouldn't bear to live with as friends - that's either ego-shadow or ego-aspirational because both are at odds and people at that time married young, before they were mature to start noticing problems that these relationships bring. I have a similar distaste for this situation, maybe because I'm an INFJ, like he was.



Llyralen said:


> 6. My friend says XXXX is my ideal type, but I think the ideal for my type would be YYYY. But it seems like ZZZZ is the only type attracted to me and I think I’m only attracted to GGGG. Plus I can’t type anybody myself, I rely on my friends who found out about MBTI a few months ago and people’s online profiles to date, also I just read an article by Joe Schmo who thinks HHHH and my type would be a “Golden pairing” and explains that it’s the only way CCCC will ever truly be happy and able to grow and CCCC is a rare type and so is HHHH and I love this idea of the “golden pairing”— at least the author says it is so perfect.
> I’m either doomed or MBTI isn’t really a thing. But I like saying I’m a CCCC, I get more dates that way. I think I am one anyway.
> 
> 8. My last love interest was a VVVV and liked SSSS types. They actually thought they hated my type that I thought I was then and wouldn’t give me the time of day. I think I want to see what having a profile with SSSS might do for my dating life. I can act SSSS, I probably am one. The irony for my old interest is that I actually AM SSSS. Oh,man, the irony!


People who are trying to make use of knowledge like that are responsible for knowing their own type and the type of their loved one. Individual mistyping is not the fault of someone they take knowledge from when that knowledge doesn't give false clues on how to type people.

Either people are adults and are responsible for their own decisions or they are not adults and they should not be allowed to make decisions such as who to marry or be with.



Llyralen said:


> Question: Do we truly see others as individuals beyond type?


Type on type matching has nothing to do with individuality. It's only one layer out of who knows how many. Cognitive functions tells us how a person processes information and makes decisions, also informs us about their worries and needs, some that the person isn't even aware themselves. Cognitive functions don't tell us what type of music you listen to - although even that can be fairly similar for people of the same type.

This is not about individuals, it's more about _N_Js knowing that they cannot trust words of an ENFP when saying they want to be with them, because high Ne decisions are always liable to change in a manner that _N_Js cannot follow and that's... just no. Never again.



Llyralen said:


> Question: Do we get too mixed up in whatever anyone is saying about ideal pairings?


No, not really. Who's 'we' anyway?



Llyralen said:


> Question: What have you experienced? What have you seen?


Horror.


----------



## mushr00m (May 23, 2011)

This thread topic has been on my mind for some considerable time and did just want to add some cents/pennies into the jar before they vanished.

The promoters of the theory that we are best suited to those who possess our inferior functions as dominant functions in their cognitive conscious make up, I mean that is wonderful in theory. I witness it even works successfully from an outside point of view, i've seen mature ESFJ/INTP couples that have been together for decades and appear to be happy. I have seen ESTJ/INFP couples that have deteriorated - was it each individuals Fi that jarred each other? Maybe it was their particular functional make up that inherantly positioned the pair to a difficult dynamic whereas with the ESFJ/INTP, their functional differences were matched in the feeling realm creating an open space to explore and grow rather than a wall between the two? What about other contexts such as traditional values which provided more incentive to maintain their relationship despite difficulties and barriers.
But to place people together in an arbitrary fashion according to a dominant and inferior function complimentary dynamic, is quite generic and perhaps the wrong context, it is not that simple or even the purpose for all romantic contexts and also what the invididual wishes for in a romantic partner. A romantic partnership is surely not simply a transactional one but an unconditional one which you could argue, well that could border into codependency which of course, the transaction one depending on how you look at it, could also.

Perhaps this dynamic/theory is better suited to that of a certain friendship, a teacher/student relationship, a therapist/therapee relationship, one where the boundaries are not intermingled in such a way that would create a power imbalance as far as the wishes and desires of certain individuals are concerned.


----------



## ciel sos infel (12 mo ago)

mushr00m said:


> This thread topic has been on my mind for some considerable time and did just want to add some cents/pennies into the jar before they vanished.
> 
> The promoters of the theory that we are best suited to those who possess our inferior functions as dominant functions in their cognitive conscious make up, I mean that is wonderful in theory. I witness it even works successfully from an outside point of view, i've seen mature ESFJ/INTP couples that have been together for decades and appear to be happy. I have seen ESTJ/INFP couples that have deteriorated - was it each individuals Fi that jarred each other? Maybe it was their particular functional make up that inherantly positioned the pair to a difficult dynamic whereas with the ESFJ/INTP, their functional differences were matched in the feeling realm creating an open space to explore and grow rather than a wall between the two? What about other contexts such as traditional values which provided more incentive to maintain their relationship despite difficulties and barriers.
> But to place people together in an arbitrary fashion according to a dominant and inferior function complimentary dynamic, is quite generic and perhaps the wrong context, it is not that simple or even the purpose for all romantic contexts and also what the invididual wishes for in a romantic partner. A romantic partnership is surely not simply a transactional one but an unconditional one which you could argue, well that could border into codependency which of course, the transaction one depending on how you look at it, could also.
> ...


I agree that ego-aspirational (e.g. ESFJ/INTP) is not the optimal pairing and I agree with your conclusion that it's better to realize that connection in a teacher/student sort of frienship. However the problem with matching dominant and inferior function of same polarity isn't the complimentary aspect of it because, in actuality, it's not truly complimentary. Where, I'd suggest, the problem lies is in the fact that dominant function will tends to shoulder the challenges, leaving the inferior out of the equation. That doesn't happen though if it's introverted function vs extroverted function because there's always a place to shine for the weaker one in that arrangement _(since the other person doesn't have that function in the ego)_ while it still provides support and instruction for the inferior.
There's more problems though between ego and aspirational. Initially between these types there might be that sort of adoration with each looking up to one another. As the relationship progresses though one or both of the partners will make attempts to 'parrot' each other, to act out their aspirational forms (4 sides of mind theory). That breaks the adoration aspect because one sees the other trying to act like them and failing at it. This in turn can cause conflicts and misunderstandings which are likely to cause both persons to neglect acting out their aspirational forms with each other and thus shutting the aspirational out of the relationship. Even if that gets sorted out through maturity the fact remains that the partner with strong functions will tackle most tasks which need them, keeping the other in the default state of frustration and demoralization about their lower functions, never realizing their potential in the confines of the relationship.
It's also very likely that after one partner realizes that they can do the same thing as the other the adoration will fade out leaving the annoyance that comes from seeing the incompetence of lower functions. For example I'm an INFJ and my brother is an ESTP and though at first I had that adoration for him it vanished after feeling the brunt of his constant irresponsiblity and witnessing his flimsiness. These patterns of behaviour are intolerable to my Ne nemesis and I think that to it's sensors he was practically a high Ne user and it's that way for every function interaction.


----------



## Llyralen (Sep 4, 2017)

@ciel sos infel One person’s individual experience doesn’t translate to other people’s individual experiences in the way that you just outlined. I’m not trying to be rude but I don’t feel like I can let misinformation stand when it’s stated like fact. ESTPs can be extremely responsible just like any type and I don’t see much Ne in any ESTPs who I know and I’m not sure why you think that has any barring on your particular experience with your sibling anyway. 

You cannot predict adoration or general responses in types to other types. Individuals don’t predictably initially adore in someone else what is inferior in themselves and then predictably have that function fall from grace.


----------



## Llyralen (Sep 4, 2017)

mushr00m said:


> This thread topic has been on my mind for some considerable time and did just want to add some cents/pennies into the jar before they vanished.
> 
> The promoters of the theory that we are best suited to those who possess our inferior functions as dominant functions in their cognitive conscious make up, I mean that is wonderful in theory. I witness it even works successfully from an outside point of view, i've seen mature ESFJ/INTP couples that have been together for decades and appear to be happy. I have seen ESTJ/INFP couples that have deteriorated - was it each individuals Fi that jarred each other? Maybe it was their particular functional make up that inherantly positioned the pair to a difficult dynamic whereas with the ESFJ/INTP, their functional differences were matched in the feeling realm creating an open space to explore and grow rather than a wall between the two? What about other contexts such as traditional values which provided more incentive to maintain their relationship despite difficulties and barriers.
> But to place people together in an arbitrary fashion according to a dominant and inferior function complimentary dynamic, is quite generic and perhaps the wrong context, it is not that simple or even the purpose for all romantic contexts and also what the invididual wishes for in a romantic partner. A romantic partnership is surely not simply a transactional one but an unconditional one which you could argue, well that could border into codependency which of course, the transaction one depending on how you look at it, could also.
> ...


I’ve seen the same as you and the only studies available support what you’ve/we’ve seen pretty much. Somewhere in this thread @Windblownhair was kind enough to list what was found in a study on marriage satisfaction. SJ and NF s rated their satisfaction with each other as low. The worst looking like NFP and STJ since SFJs rated their satisfaction with NFPs as very high— maybe the highest in all satisfaction— but the available data just asked NFPs about satisfaction with SJ in general it looked like with satisfaction being low. That is what I got from the available info. Not that individual people or relationships can’t be exceptions— they can.

I’ve seen some really good INTP/ESFJ pairs on here and in real life, the NT satisfaction reports are different than the NF for the idea of duals. This is what you’re saying right? And I would agree. Duals might work better in some groups than in others— making it a theory for every type can be very bad advice from the look at real life and from the available studies as well. 

Was it Socionics that theorized “dual” pairings as being ideal? Whenever I read any Socionics info I wonder if the person theorizing it knew any real people. But because I recognize Socionics as nonsense based on nothing, Nonsense or very damaging advice, either way.


----------



## ciel sos infel (12 mo ago)

Llyralen said:


> @ciel sos infel One person’s individual experience doesn’t translate to other people’s individual experiences in the way that you do it.


If there were no patterns of behaviour the would be no typology possible. I divide my personal reactions from the patterns by looking if other people fell into similar pattern in similar context.



Llyralen said:


> I’m not trying to be rude but I don’t feel like I can let misinformation stand when it’s stated like fact.


Well, it's not misinformation, I don't think you've understood me correctly and the pattern is that ENFPs usually don't and it's not a jab at you or _NFPs, it's just a default problem in communciation between low Ti and low Te that I've seen other people noting as well.



Llyralen said:


> ESTPs can be extremely responsible just like any type and I don’t see much Ne in any ESTPs who I know and I’m not sure why you think that has any barring on your particular experience with your sibling either.


I was talking about how dominant introverted function perceives inferior introverted function. It wasn't an objective statement about individuals. That being said your standard of responsibility will be completely different than mine so our judgements in that matter would be incomparable.
The Ne is pretty much nonexistent in ESTPs. I haven't said that it is there, but that Ni inferior is as unpredictable and irresponsible as Ne hero in the eyes of Ne nemesis.



Llyralen said:


> I think Ne is usually difficult for Ni to recognize without some training/familiarity.


When I saw Ne eyes _(moving all over the place instead of being focused on the person you're talking to)_ in my ex ENFP girlfriend I felt an inexplicable sense of dread, but I ignored it, seeing no logical basis at the time. I didn't know about typology, psychology or anything of the sort back then. That fear was Ne nemesis activating upon perception of limited attention span of high Ne.



Llyralen said:


> You cannot predict adoration or general responses in types to other types. People don’t predictably initially adore in someone else what is inferior in themselves.


I didn't make a statement "every INFJ will adore an ESTP". What I've said is that when attraction happens between the types it's nature is that of adoration. That is the mechanical underpinning of that attraction. We're attracted to different people for different reasons, are we not?

On a side note I think might be conflating individuality of personality (experiences, judgements, preferences - though even those can be very, very similar between people of the same type), which I don't deny, with individuality of the mechanisms that our minds use to process information and make judgements. I'm not denying individuality of "who" but merely the individuality of "how".


----------



## Llyralen (Sep 4, 2017)

ciel sos infel said:


> If there were no patterns of behaviour the would be no typology possible. I divide my personal reactions from the patterns by looking if other people fell into similar pattern in similar context.
> 
> 
> Well, it's not misinformation, I don't think you've understood me correctly and the pattern is that ENFPs usually don't and it's not a jab at you or _NFPs, it's just a default problem in communciation between low Ti and low Te that I've seen other people noting as well.
> ...


But I’m afraid it’s all just…incorrect…
Your perceptions are wrong.
Listening to you for me is like hearing someone say “I mixed red and yellow and it made green. Red and yellow make green, everyone. Stay away from green.” 

It’s like I don’t even know where to start. How can I help you? But you don’t think you need it! Something about the superiority of your tertiary Ti? For matters about people? Come on…Eh, it would take too much time! And you’re not even open for it. Okay… I will not be rude further. Do your thing. I am afraid I will have to do mine by continuing to say “That’s incorrect…”


----------



## ciel sos infel (12 mo ago)

Llyralen said:


> But I’m afraid it’s all just…incorrect…
> Your perceptions are wrong.
> Listening to you for me is like hearing someone say “I mixed red and yellow and it made green. Red and yellow make green, everyone. Stay away from green.”
> 
> It’s like I don’t even know where to start. How can I help you? But you don’t think you need it! Something about the superiority of your tertiary Ti? For matters about people? Come on…Eh, it would take too much time! And you’re not even open for it. Okay… I will not be rude further. Do your thing. I am afraid I will have to do mine by continuing to say “That’s incorrect…”


That's just like, your opinion, woman. You haven't substantiated it in any way so as it is now it only hinges on the strength of your conviction, which is meaningless to the reader, because it's unverifiable and uninformative.

At least what I got from it is a confirmation of a suspicion that I had, namely that ESTPs and ENFPs work very, very similarly in a conversation, so thanks for that, I guess.


----------



## mushr00m (May 23, 2011)

ciel sos infel said:


> I agree that ego-aspirational (e.g. ESFJ/INTP) is not the optimal pairing and I agree with your conclusion that it's better to realize that connection in a teacher/student sort of frienship. However the problem with matching dominant and inferior function of same polarity isn't the complimentary aspect of it because, in actuality, it's not truly complimentary. Where, I'd suggest, the problem lies is in the fact that dominant function will tends to shoulder the challenges, leaving the inferior out of the equation. That doesn't happen though if it's introverted function vs extroverted function because there's always a place to shine for the weaker one in that arrangement _(since the other person doesn't have that function in the ego)_ while it still provides support and instruction for the inferior.
> There's more problems though between ego and aspirational. Initially between these types there might be that sort of adoration with each looking up to one another. As the relationship progresses though one or both of the partners will make attempts to 'parrot' each other, to act out their aspirational forms (4 sides of mind theory). That breaks the adoration aspect because one sees the other trying to act like them and failing at it. This in turn can cause conflicts and misunderstandings which are likely to cause both persons to neglect acting out their aspirational forms with each other and thus shutting the aspirational out of the relationship. Even if that gets sorted out through maturity the fact remains that the partner with strong functions will tackle most tasks which need them, keeping the other in the default state of frustration and demoralization about their lower functions, never realizing their potential in the confines of the relationship.
> It's also very likely that after one partner realizes that they can do the same thing as the other the adoration will fade out leaving the annoyance that comes from seeing the incompetence of lower functions. For example I'm an INFJ and my brother is an ESTP and though at first I had that adoration for him it vanished after feeling the brunt of his constant irresponsiblity and witnessing his flimsiness. These patterns of behaviour are intolerable to my Ne nemesis and I think that to it's sensors he was practically a high Ne user and it's that way for every function interaction.


I think following Llyralens connection (thankyou!), that it's a case of half true and half not true or to that effect. Such as ESFJ/INTP relationships may well be validating this _ego aspirational_ dynamic whereas other types such as the ESTJ/INFP do not. Funnily enough, it has tended to be INTP's who have more often been promoters of the theory than many other types, at least from their online discussions. I do however hear of some successful ENFP/ISTJ pairings that appear to provide a counterbalance to each other although need to see more evidence of this. I suspect the dominant extroverted intuition function is largely at play in terms of openness to experience, perhaps? And how does this manifest in ENTP's? 
INFP's lower satisfaction rate stats seem to equate in real terms to the end results of their romantic relationships, yes I know I may be jumping the gun on that but one can't help making the loose correlation. INFP's have been known to have some more success with ISTJ's, again though, need more data to further cooborate this. ISFP/INTJ couples seem to provide a harmonious counter balance to each other from my personal observations. This is not to say, these relationships are flawless, of course not. But there is enough difference in priorities whilst maintaining a middle ground point of reference.

Regarding your point about the responsibility of the dominant function owner, I wander again if it being Je/Ji/Pe/Pi would affect the pattern of interplay, Je for example naturally taking control of the external environment, that this would create grounds for power imbalance or if that would even constitute a power imbalance anyway but would work in favour of a harmonious balance such as the ESFJ/INTP pairings. Of course, as you state and I agree with, that there is room for those less honed functions to enact themselves out in the course of a relationship - if I have understood you correctly.

Yes that is a stumping ground and for all good intents and purposes, no matter how much we may try to think we are developing ourselves or pushing our comfort zone, it will naturally tend to feel unnatural if we stray too far into the existence of another outside of our natural baseline, I suspect this could cause some sort of psyche fragmentation/splintering in certain persons or types, that is of course a postulation im aware. 

Could you perhaps give a concrete example of what it was about your ESTP brother that you idolised, if you don't mind that is. Im not quite understanding your Ne function connection. Thankyou.


----------



## maximum danger (4 mo ago)

ciel sos infel said:


> That's just like, your opinion, woman. You haven't substantiated it in any way so as it is now it only hinges on the strength of your conviction, which is meaningless to the reader, because it's unverifiable and uninformative.
> 
> At least what I got from it is a confirmation of a suspicion that I had, namely that ESTPs and ENFPs work very, very similarly in a conversation, so thanks for that, I guess.


Talk enough and you'll find all types that will end up talking to you that way. And trust, it's not about them.


----------



## ciel sos infel (12 mo ago)

mushr00m said:


> I think following Llyralens connection (thankyou!), that it's a case of half true and half not true or to that effect. Such as ESFJ/INTP relationships may well be validating this _ego aspirational_ dynamic whereas other types such as the ESTJ/INFP do not.


How so? The interactions between ESFJ/INTP and ESTJ/INFP are perfectly analogous. I see no reason for them to be different, other than some individual variations between people.



mushr00m said:


> I do however hear of some successful ENFP/ISTJ pairings that appear to provide a counterbalance to each other although need to see more evidence of this.


There's no actual mechanical difference between basic function interactions. Ne is analogous to Se, Ni is analogous to Si, Fe is analogous to Te and Fi is analogous to Ti. That's also the reason why we're very similar in some respect to our super-ego type (e.g. INFP-ISTP) despite not sharing any function with them (but every function being analogous so our cognition works analogously).



mushr00m said:


> I suspect the dominant extroverted intuition function is largely at play in terms of openness to experience, perhaps? And how does this manifest in ENTP's?


Okay, I understand how an ENFP would be willing to try, that is Ne hero's peculiarity. Willing to try though doesn't equal willing to stay in the relationship.
ENTP will be less likely to act on a whim, they're largely ignorant about their emotional sphere. That could make them stay in such a relationship longer, I guess, but if they notice an available option that makes more sense they can jump the boat just as well so ultimately I don't think its that big of a difference.



mushr00m said:


> INFP's lower satisfaction rate stats seem to equate in real terms to the end results of their romantic relationships, yes I know I may be jumping the gun on that but one can't help making the loose correlation. INFP's have been known to have some more success with ISTJ's, again though, need more data to further cooborate this.


Well, ISTJs make up something like 18% of male population and INFPs something like 4% of women so it'd be kinda sad if that was the perfect match, but I don't think it is. Changing _STJ set into introverted doesn't change the mechanical aspect (high function remain high, low functions remain low).
You're an INFP correct? Have you investigated INFP-INTP? I've heard from several types, and I've experienced that as well, that when we fall for a fictional character it's usually our T/F variant (so for INFP that's INTP, for INFJ that's INTJ). I took it as a clue, went with it and I discovered something very interesting.



mushr00m said:


> ISFP/INTJ couples seem to provide a harmonious counter balance to each other from my personal observations. This is not to say, these relationships are flawless, of course not. But there is enough difference in priorities whilst maintaining a middle ground point of reference.


You're looking at every pairing separately, empirically, not noticing the underlying pattern, very Ne.
My father is an ISTP and though I don't exactly hate him, he didn't neglect me when I needed to be taken to a hospital etc. he did however neglect me emotionally and every idea I've raised when we worked together (pretty much the only way I could spend time with him) he shot it down instantly, without proper explanations or hearing me out. Low introverted function is easy to damage. High introverted function has little mercy for low introverted function. In the same way ISFP will not care much about INTJ's feeble attempts at moral judgements, identity, creativity, whims, impressions etc. Fi hero doesn't provide 'training wheels' for lower Fi's.



mushr00m said:


> Regarding your point about the responsibility of the dominant function owner, I wander again if it being Je/Ji/Pe/Pi would affect the pattern of interplay, Je for example naturally taking control of the external environment, that this would create grounds for power imbalance or if that would even constitute a power imbalance anyway but would work in favour of a harmonious balance such as the ESFJ/INTP pairings.


Hmm... I strictly referred to responsibility as something which comes from Ni. I guess there can be different kinds of responsibility - Fi being responsible with it's moral system (polishing it up, taking time to make judgement and so on), Ti responsible with it's model of how reality works (making it very complex and encompassing as much as possible before making judgement) etc. but I meant responsibility in terms of decision making, planning.

Ni simulates consequences of the action before making a move and since Ni user largely knows what the consequences are going to be _(simulation is only a simulation but the more experienced a person is the more accurate they get at that simulation providing realistic outcomes)_ they can't turn back on their decision easily _(at least high Ni users)_. They knew what would happen, they knew what this action would bring and what it would require, they've made their bed and now they're gonna sleep in it - they're taking responsibility for their decision, they're following through because they knew the conditions beforehand and they've accepted them.

Untrained low Ni doesn't simulate far into the future so it's more liable to pulling out. In some situations it might be a good thing but in others not so much.



mushr00m said:


> Of course, as you state and I agree with, that there is room for those less honed functions to enact themselves out in the course of a relationship - if I have understood you correctly.


There's one negation missing here so I'll clarify what I meant.
In dominant function + inferior function of same polarity (Ni hero + Ni inferior) there's very little opportunity for inferior to develop.



mushr00m said:


> Yes that is a stumping ground and for all good intents and purposes, no matter how much we may try to think we are developing ourselves or pushing our comfort zone, it will naturally tend to feel unnatural if we stray too far into the existence of another outside of our natural baseline, I suspect this could cause some sort of psyche fragmentation/splintering in certain persons or types, that is of course a postulation im aware.


I only know about some real heavy trauma causing it, not sure about comfort zone pushing _(unless you do something crazy right out of the bat)_. I'm not sure if that's what you meant but I also think that pushing our comfort zone too much isn't actually very helpful. I'd suspect it has a yo-yo effect to it, like loosing weight, it needs to be done the right way, rather than at a push. That's one of the reasons why I think the 'training wheels' arrangement (e.g. Fi inferior + Fe hero) works really good - while the stronger function pulls the weaker up it also seeks to support it and it allows the weaker to do it's thing because, though it's stronger, it cannot ever do the things that the it can do _(following the example Fe hero only has access to negative Fi - what is immoral, what is bland, what is meaningless, what the user doesn't feel like doing, what user doesn't personally like etc.) _



mushr00m said:


> Could you perhaps give a concrete example of what it was about your ESTP brother that you idolised, if you don't mind that is. Im not quite understanding your Ne function connection. Thankyou.


I think I looked up to his confidence the most. With Ti child, brutalized by both my ESTP brother and my ISTP father, I had no confidence in myself whatsoever. In absence of information we look at other people through the lens of our own selves so being timid and unsure about my decisions I'd need some very strong support in my actual capability to have even remotely the pride they had. I really thought that's how it works - that I suck and everyone else is confident because they have passed all sorts of hurdles that I'd need to pass to have that degree of belief in myself. Oh how naive I was! I'll tell you how I woke up, at least when it came to my brother, it should illustrate the problem well.

I went hiking with my him, we were teenagers still, but I trusted his confidence. If it was me I wouldn't invite him like that if I didn't know what I was doing. I knew how much I'd have to plan and prepare to venture into the wilderness so I assumed he took care of everything.

We didn't have proper equipment, we weren't prepared to stay there for the night and, at least how I remember, it was close to eventide but we were miles away from the closest mountain hostel. It started raining and my ESTP brother choose a way that lead through the high mountains. There was this one passage with very little support other than a chain rammed into the very rock and an incomplete, narrow and, due to rain, quite slippery ledge under it. I have a fear of heights and he knew that, he just didn't care whatsoever.

He crossed it easily, he was older after all, at that age several years make all the difference in the world, and, well he was an Se hero to boot _(ESTPs make great firefighters and rescue workers for a reason)_, but I, clumsy as I was... I don't remember how long it took me to even try, I just remember he was yelling at me the entire time. From that point on I've never trusted him with anything.

As for Ne let's take this situation as an example. Ne nemesis hates unpredictable behaviour and circumstances. Entire bloody excursion with him was an continual Ne nemesis trigger. Outside of that were times he went back on his word, when he suddenly changed his plans etc. That has to do with his Ni inferior and that flimsiness and irresponsibility was intolerable to me.

I hope it's more understandable now.


----------



## FaeSoleil (8 mo ago)

The stickler point in the end for me is that people can never agree what types are meant to go with which types - everyone has their own takes and their own reasons they're so convinced it's true.

For what I think personally... I don't know. I seem to be able to be the one to adapt as far as my personal relationships goes, and these last few years has been a long process of me realizing that not everyone can do that, and to advise other people to do so is not helpful. I have a very close relationship with a INFJ myself and have for a while - but there's a lot of weird stuff about the both of us that doesn't make that a typical example at all.

Since then, I've seen a lot of relationship problems in other people due to misunderstandings that seem obvious - but people just can't seem to move past for reasons I don't fully understand. Time will tell if I'm holding onto false hope for those situations or not.


----------

