# MBTI stereotypes in school and how they each deal with rules



## Blazy (Oct 30, 2010)

monemi said:


> The ESTP is always a male jock. I'm not sure where the female ESTP's fit in there. And no, I don't think most of us were tom boys.
> 
> I moved a lot, so I was consistently the new kid.


Most of you aren't tom boys. Take Taylor Swift as an example as well as bunch of other girls who'd do anything to get attention and be prom queen, etc.


----------



## aphinion (Apr 30, 2013)

I wouldn't say that I'm a bully, but I can be an ass when I want to. 



KraChZiMan said:


> *INTJ*: The teacher who arranges every lesson to be in lecture form. Wants to tell you every backstory, every person, every theory and every single influential factor in the subject, but makes relatively easy tests for students.


Yeah this is pretty true except for the easy tests. My Math class might as well be called Math History, my teacher teaches us so much about every mathematician. On the plus side, it's pretty hilarious.


----------



## MisterDantes (Nov 24, 2013)

> ESTJ: I don't stereotypically see them as much as a bully as someone who's so assertive that he/she intimidates (and irritates) others. He/she doesn't just follow the rules, but strictly enforce the rules.
> ISTJ: Hardworking, overachieving, follows the rules to a tee. Secretly judgmental when someone does not, but doesn't actually say anything out loud.
> ISFJ: Also hardworking, but not as overachieving as the above. Follows the rules, but is more sympathetic when someone does not.
> ESFJ: More lenient when it comes to schoolwork, but would never get in trouble with the authorities.
> ...


That's pretty much spot-on my current class XD a cookie for you!


----------



## Pinkieshyrose (Jan 30, 2013)

Raawx said:


> You're using a persons current personality and comparing it with that person's high school self. This thinking is flawed, predominantly because personalities change as time progresses, thus comparing the two doesn't make sense.
> 
> For example, in high school I would have considered myself an ISTJ, but now I'm an INTJ. If I was your father, you would compare me to an INTJ, which wouldn't make sense.


Yes, but this thread is about stereotypes so does it really matter?


----------



## Raawx (Oct 9, 2013)

Pinkieshyrose said:


> Yes, but this thread is about stereotypes so does it really matter?


How is that relevant? You took bad data and applied it to these certain stereotypes; thus, your information should be disregarded from the larger discussion. 

Don't take it personally, you're an F.


----------



## Pinkieshyrose (Jan 30, 2013)

Raawx said:


> How is that relevant? You took bad data and applied it to these certain stereotypes; thus, your information should be disregarded from the larger discussion.
> 
> Don't take it personally, you're an F.



Should my personality even come to play here? I am not talking it personally. Just because i'm a "feeler" doesn't mean I am going to be upset by every comment. Just because I am using the word I does not mean I am taking anything seriously.:dry: Now your stereotyping based on my type. :laughing:I take almost nothing seriously.:tongue:

Now I will explain how this is relevant it is relevant because you cant say it isn't.

You cant say that there personality's will change they may or may not. They personality's might have already changed. You do not have a right to say if its bad data if you do not now each of them as test subjects or friends or both and even then you cant predict.


----------



## Raawx (Oct 9, 2013)

Pinkieshyrose said:


> Should my personality even come to play here? I am not talking it personally. Just because i'm a "feeler" doesn't mean I am going to be upset by every comment. Just because I am using the word I does not mean I am taking anything seriously.:dry: Now your stereotyping based on my type. :laughing:I take almost nothing seriously.:tongue:
> 
> Now I will explain how this is relevant it is relevant because you cant say it isn't.
> 
> You cant say that there personality's will change they may or may not. They personality's might have already changed. You do not have a right to say if its bad data if you do not now each of them as test subjects or friends or both and even then you cant predict.


No, not because you might get offended; you're letting your personal judgements get in the way of reason. I've made a fair point, yet you don't feel the need to contest. That, and you used subjective data to further your claim. it's Knowing your MBTI is not stereotyping.

I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that it's bad data because it is inconsistent; again comparing apples and oranges. You could make an observation on how your friends and family's personality types have CHANGED, but you cannot use them to compare to the stereotypes unless they are actually IN high school.

Why am I even fighting on such a moot point? :I


----------



## Raawx (Oct 9, 2013)

x


----------



## Pinkieshyrose (Jan 30, 2013)

Raawx said:


> No, not because you might get offended; you're letting your personal judgements get in the way of reason. I've made a fair point, yet you don't feel the need to contest. That, and you used subjective data to further your claim. it's Knowing your MBTI is not stereotyping.
> 
> I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that it's bad data because it is inconsistent; again comparing apples and oranges. You could make an observation on how your friends and family's personality types have CHANGED, but you cannot use them to compare to the stereotypes unless they are actually IN high school.
> 
> Why am I even fighting on such a moot point? :I


In the way of reason? How is this reason this is just your reason. If you were actually being factual or explaining yourself a bit then more maybe . No but saying that I am taking it personally because I use f that is stereotyping. :dry:

I am using subjective reason!:happy: :tongue:


Data is not "bad" if its inconsistent or at-least it isn't in my opinion. Apples and oranges are both fruit. 



How do you know if they are not in high school.:bored:


----------



## Raawx (Oct 9, 2013)

Pinkieshyrose said:


> In the way of reason? How is this reason this is just your reason. If you were actually being factual or explaining yourself a bit then more maybe . No but saying that I am taking it personally because I use f that is stereotyping. :dry:
> 
> I am using subjective reason!:happy: :tongue:
> 
> ...


Eh, call it what you may. I've made a fair argument. Read it over if you want to understand my point, as I've made it fairly clear.

Subjective reason? That shouldn't play a factor into analysis. If this were a science experiment using the "data" that you gathered, you would try to avoid all subjectivities.

And yes, it is. Some of your data was fine, because I'm *assuming* that you're in high school and that some of your friends are in high school as well. How do I know some of them are not in high school? You added your parents into the mix.


----------



## Pinkieshyrose (Jan 30, 2013)

Raawx said:


> Eh, call it what you may. I've made a fair argument. Read it over if you want to understand my point, as I've made it fairly clear.
> 
> Subjective reason? That shouldn't play a factor into analysis. If this were a science experiment using the "data" that you gathered, you would try to avoid all subjectivities.
> 
> And yes, it is. Some of your data was fine, because I'm *assuming* that you're in high school and that some of your friends are in high school as well. How do I know some of them are not in high school? You added your parents into the mix.


Yes, but how do you know if there personality has changed? My parents have have told me story's about themselves as younger
there the same people as when they were who they were before. If anything they have just have just been able to use a few functions that aren't apart of there type.

Hmmm, this is why I am not a scientist. I myself am subjective data.:tongue: Is this a science experiment? If it was I wouldn't have typed. Though now that I think of it I remember in second grade I did make a science poster for a science project that ended up with a poor grade because we had the freedom to come up with a project so silly me decided to use the effect of dice rolling as "scientific data". At-least even then my personality type was clear.

Subjective reason can be used in a argument however.:ninja:

-sorry if you deem this personal data. Just a tiny little tangent.


----------



## piscesfish (Nov 30, 2013)

According to this guide, I'm a total ISTJ! Guess rule-following straight-A INFJs aren't as common, eh? XD


----------



## TripleCardinal (Nov 7, 2013)

I related most to the ISFP. However I enjoy abstract thinking very much.

As an INFP I didn't really ever have a "goth" phase (I love light colors)... I was offered to take AP Lit in high school but I didn't like being stereotyped as a nerd & took the regular classes instead. I do like writing but it's often very personal & I'd rather not let anyone read it.


----------



## Karma Butterfly (Jul 15, 2013)

Satan Claus said:


> *So this was stolen from tumblr under the "MBTI" tag. I liked it and thought I'd share.
> 
> The poster had this for each MBTI type and their school stereotypes:*
> 
> ...


Totally _not _how I was in school. I was the quiet one with impressive skills that actually loved to gossip and make sarcastic comments under my breath to my friends amusement. My classmates saw me as a nerd, but the truth is I never studied or did my homework but still stood out.

And my attitude to rules was the ISFP one: break all the rules without anyone ever noticing.


----------



## Dezir (Nov 25, 2013)

Satan Claus said:


> *So this was stolen from tumblr under the "MBTI" tag. I liked it and thought I'd share.
> 
> The poster had this for each MBTI type and their school stereotypes:*
> 
> ...


Cool topic, this is just my point of view but I think you confuse INTP with INTJ. INTP are very lazy, some facts says that in school, INTP have lower grades than would be predicted from aptitude scores. So due to their lazyness I think it's more likely for them to focus on one subject and not caring about others unless there is a really good reason. While INTJ are too orderly and full of pride to have bad grades at anything.


----------



## Satan Claus (Aug 6, 2013)

Dezir said:


> Cool topic, this is just my point of view but I think you confuse INTP with INTJ. INTP are very lazy, some facts says that in school, INTP have lower grades than would be predicted from aptitude scores. So due to their lazyness I think it's more likely for them to focus on one subject and not caring about others unless there is a really good reason. While INTJ are too orderly and full of pride to have bad grades at anything.


I didn't make this but ok


----------



## Despotic Nepotist (Mar 1, 2014)

In regards to the school personality stereotypes, I think I fit the INFJ one. But, in regards to rules and all, I fit the INTJ AND the INTP one.



piscesfish said:


> According to this guide, I'm a total ISTJ! Guess rule-following straight-A INFJs aren't as common, eh? XD


As if INFJs weren't rare enough. :laughing:


----------



## Despotic Nepotist (Mar 1, 2014)

piscesfish said:


> According to this guide, I'm a total ISTJ! Guess rule-following straight-A INFJs aren't as common, eh? XD


As if INFJs weren't rare enough. :laughing:


----------



## JTHearts (Aug 6, 2013)

I'm ESFJ and I was popular in school until everyone started being mean to me and then I isolated myself and started hating myself


----------



## Grandmaster Yoda (Jan 18, 2014)

For me that's fairly accurate. Especially last year.


----------



## GundamChao (Jun 17, 2014)

Satan Claus said:


> *Than another poster made this on how each type deals with the rules:
> 
> *ENFP: Ooops! I didn’t realize there were rules!


Yep, that's what we WOULD say... but you guys should know that that's just a way to play innocent. :wink:


----------



## Satan Claus (Aug 6, 2013)

GundamChao said:


> Yep, that's what we WOULD say... but you guys should know that that's just a way to play innocent. :wink:


Well, yes of course. We're quite good at that! :wink:


----------

