# NT women: Dating, Sex, and Relationships



## n2freedom (Jun 2, 2011)

Relationships are my Achilles heel. And, to be honest I totally suck at them. So, I have decided to take a break from them. Therefore, I have decided that I'm more interested in "sex with no strings attached" arrangements.

However, I have found that most men I have been sexually involved with don't handle *real* sex with no strings attached" arrangements very well. My first question is if you have been in a *real* sex with no strings attached arrangements? Has it gone smoothly for you?

Secondly, I can love someone and not get emotionally attached, not invest in them emotionally, and not want to be in a relationship with them. In other words, I can love a man but not see a future with him. Therefore, I'm only going to allow myself to go so far with him. Can you relate to this?

Lastly, it seems to me being in love is like some type of switch with me. I can love you today and basically decide to leave you tomorrow if the situation calls for it. I'll feel hurt for about 3 days....ten at the most and I'm pretty much over it and prepared to get on with life. Am I alone when it comes to "love"?

Like I said, I suck at relationships..... How has dating, sex, and relationships been for you?


----------



## quadrivium (Nov 6, 2011)

I have been in a "no strings attached" relationship before; I thought it was fine, but the other person didn't. This was years ago before men realized that there are really women out there that want that and not just saying it.

I am like you, in that I can like a person, even fall for them, but guard myself if I don't see a future. Dating is frivolous enough without having an end result in mind. 
For the most part (first story excluded lol), I have been a serial monogamist, and the men have all thought me to be too distant/cold/quiet/intimidating. I have an independent streak in me, and I hate a possessive, jealous boyfriend. Even in break-ups, I've mostly felt relieved. It's been a battle to find someone who can let me be me. 

Good luck with your pursuits!


----------



## knittigan (Sep 2, 2011)

All of what you have said reminds me a lot of discussions I have with my ENTJ friend about our love lives.

Relationships are hard for me, too, but they're hardest when I'm dating other xxTxs. I'm not emotionally intelligent and neither are most men but I'm a deeply sensitive person and I need a lot of emotional support in a relationship that they just can't seem to give me. My current boyfriend is an INFJ and I'm finding that we have a much stronger relationship than I've ever had in the past.

As for casual sex, I'd like to be able to do it, but can't. I get very, very emotionally attached to the people I sleep with. I can actually be in a relationship with someone and feel relatively independent and detached, but the second we have sex, I start giving them the big, adoring doe eyes.

It's funny that you said that you can love someone that you don't see a future with because I'm exactly the opposite. I come off as very fickle when I'm initially interested in someone because I'm very unsure of my feelings as a result of constantly imagining what our future will be like; it's only when I can see a tangible future with someone that I decide it's worth the risk to proceed. The moment I start to doubt that, I go almost completely cold and start moving on immediately... which I guess is similar to what you said afterall.


----------



## Runvardh (May 17, 2011)

More guys lying to themselves, didn't see that coming. I'm like Knittigan, I can't do casual; but it bugs me when people lie about what they want, no matter which side of that fence they say they are on. Yes, I'm a guy responding in your thread, but part of me thought that most guys would love the casual thing and that I was just strange. Looks like the part about me that's strange is that I know damn well what my preferences are instead of bullshitting to get my cock wet. You girls deserve better.


----------



## n2freedom (Jun 2, 2011)

Runvardh said:


> More guys lying to themselves, didn't see that coming. I'm like Knittigan, I can't do casual; but it bugs me when people lie about what they want, no matter which side of that fence they say they are on. Yes, I'm a guy responding in your thread, but part of me thought that most guys would love the casual thing and that I was just strange. Looks like the part about me that's strange is that I know damn well what my preferences are instead of bullshitting to get my cock wet. You girls deserve better.


 Just so I'm clear...are you NT or NF?


----------



## Snakecharmer (Oct 26, 2010)

n2freedom said:


> Relationships are my Achilles heel. And, to be honest I totally suck at them.
> 
> Secondly, I can love someone and not get emotionally attached, not invest in them emotionally, and not want to be in a relationship with them. In other words, I can love a man but not see a future with him. Therefore, I'm only going to allow myself to go so far with him. Can you relate to this?
> 
> Lastly, it seems to me being in love is like some type of switch with me. *I can love you today and basically decide to leave you tomorrow if the situation calls for it. I'll feel hurt for about 3 days....ten at the most and I'm pretty much over it and prepared to get on with life. Am I alone when it comes to "love"?*


I am exactly that way, and people don't understand it (hell, I don't understand it, either). But, I am glad I don't get attached and don't fall apart if a relationship doesn't work out. I don't even have the "hurt for 3 days or so" part. Robot...maybe, but I doubt I'm going to change at this point, and that's fine with me.

I've had a "sex only" kind of arrangement before and it worked fine.


----------



## n2freedom (Jun 2, 2011)

Snakecharmer said:


> I am exactly that way, and people don't understand it (hell, I don't understand it, either). But, I am glad I don't get attached and don't fall apart if a relationship doesn't work out. I don't even have the "hurt for 3 days or so" part. Robot...maybe, but I doubt I'm going to change at this point, and that's fine with me.
> 
> I've had a "sex only" kind of arrangement before and it worked fine.


 Thanks! It can be unsettling at times and makes me ...... uhm.... less human? *sighs* But, I guess it is what it is....


----------



## Snakecharmer (Oct 26, 2010)

n2freedom said:


> Thanks! It can be unsettling at times and makes me ...... uhm.... less human? *sighs* But, I guess it is what it is....


My sister (INTJ) is very, very selective about men, and has only had one serious relationship (she's 38). When that relationship ended, she fell apart...it took her a few YEARS to move on. She suffered a lot, and I am so grateful that I'm not that way...


----------



## n2freedom (Jun 2, 2011)

Snakecharmer said:


> My sister (INTJ) is very, very selective about men, and has only had one serious relationship (she's 38). When that relationship ended, she fell apart...it took her a few YEARS to move on. She suffered a lot, and I am so grateful that I'm not that way...


 Yes, I'm glad I'm not that way either. Dang.....only one? I can beat that record hands down. My difficulty in moving on would be finding someone interesting enough to want to get to know....not so much that I'm having a hard time getting over someone.


----------



## Snakecharmer (Oct 26, 2010)

n2freedom said:


> Yes, I'm glad I'm not that way either. Dang.....only one? I can beat that record hands down. My difficulty in moving on would be finding someone interesting enough to want to get to know....not so much that I'm having a hard time getting over someone.


She's casually dated a few men here and there, but was only serious with one. They were together for 4 years...she gave him an ultimatum (move in together and plan a future or it is over) and he left. She is better off without him, and I think she knows that now, but it took her so damn long to get past it. She's normally very logical and rational, but this guy got to her...


----------



## n2freedom (Jun 2, 2011)

Snakecharmer said:


> She's casually dated a few men here and there, but was only serious with one. They were together for 4 years...she gave him an ultimatum (move in together and plan a future or it is over) and he left. She is better off without him, and I think she knows that now, but it took her so damn long to get past it. She's normally very logical and rational, but this guy got to her...


 I must say that sometimes I will stay with a person longer than I should. However, it only happens in those rare cases where I either keep holding on to some future vision with them and/or the challenges/opportunities within relationships continues to cause me to grow. If that makes sense.....


----------



## quadrivium (Nov 6, 2011)

Snakecharmer said:


> She is better off without him, and I think she knows that now, but it took her so damn long to get past it. She's normally very logical and rational, but this guy got to her...



I think with NT women, they aren't immune to making that mistake, but hell, they usually only make that mistake once!


----------



## Runvardh (May 17, 2011)

n2freedom said:


> Just so I'm clear...are you NT or NF?


INFP; every time I question it the winding path brings me back to that type. I've also been going without sex for over four years now, so it is possible my post is just a reaction to my own personal frustration.


----------



## n2freedom (Jun 2, 2011)

Runvardh said:


> INFP; every time I question it the winding path brings me back to that type. I've also been going without sex for over four years now, so it is possible my post is just a reaction to my own personal frustration.


 WOW! Four years? I could NOT imagine.... Someone would be dead, strangled, and/or mangled if I went that long without sex... Oh no! I don't think I could EVER go that long.  *gasping for air as I think about it* WHEW!


----------



## Runvardh (May 17, 2011)

n2freedom said:


> WOW! Four years? I could NOT imagine.... Someone would be dead, strangled, and/or mangled if I went that long without sex... Oh no! I don't think I could EVER go that long.  *gasping for air as I think about it* WHEW!


Perhaps I really am good natured then. This lack frequently fuels my rage, which I irresponsibly inflict on others online, and often makes me want to burn everything around me and cause a slaughter that would soak all the dry earth in blood. It's bad enough that even animals stay away from me, so I'm sure it's also adding to the already present cockblocks I have set up.

I have thought about one night stands as a possible solution; however these would need to be quick, in a hotel room, no phone numbers, no e-mail addresses, and separate as soon as the deed is done. Even then I would have to spend the week cleaning up the oxytocin while fighting the self-loathing I'd feel. I'm pretty sure it would just make me feel worse, so there wouldn't be a point to it.


----------



## birthday (Feb 6, 2011)

My only problem is interest. I can't really force myself to remain interested in one person for so long. I just can't. Then there's the whole getting intimate part. Generally, I am repulsed by sex. Any form of touching is enough to send me into nauseating fits. I don't hug or kiss when greeting, only a mere shake of hands. They say wtf is that? I say you are at liberty to have sex with as many women as you please (not including me) but we shall still remain together. Unfortunately, not many are willing to go pass that. 

This is not a 100% occurrence though. Thank heavens for that! There are times when I just want to have sex all the time. Then it's back to the whole "Don't touch me" episode. Honestly, I've been told that I drive people insane like that.


----------



## redmanXNTP (May 17, 2011)

n2freedom said:


> Relationships are my Achilles heel. And, to be honest I totally suck at them. So, I have decided to take a break from them. Therefore, I have decided that I'm more interested in "sex with no strings attached" arrangements.
> 
> However, I have found that most men I have been sexually involved with don't handle *real* sex with no strings attached" arrangements very well. My first question is if you have been in a *real* sex with no strings attached arrangements? Has it gone smoothly for you?
> 
> ...


Yes. Coming out of a separation due to her infidelity (and we of course had other marital problems) and several years of declining frequency of sex amidst general marital tension, I had a NSA relationship purely for the sex with a woman who worked at a local business establishment. She was older, divorced and had had her own sexual awakening later in life (around 40 years old). 

We flirted, I asked her out for drinks, and she plainly laid out that she wanted to be my lover, and stated it startlingly flatly. I wasn't interested in her substantively anyway - she was hot and I was frankly out to score and sow my wild oats - and I wasn't ready for anything serious with anybody in any event, and so that's what we did for around 10 months. I'd come home from work, she'd meet up with me at my place (almost literally around the corner from where she works), we'd bang it out, and she'd leave. There were no calls and no drama. 

In short, I needed to feel like a man again and I have a pretty high sex drive and had been adrift in that regard for years in a failing marriage. It was perfect and just what I needed, and it was the best sex of my life. It was also in my mid-30's which was entirely different for me as I was much more self-aware and confident than I had been when last dating more than a decade before when I'd gotten married. 

I also knew all along that it would be temporary, both because of her and because I ultimately wanted to have a more substantial relationship with someone. She and I actually talked openly about that. 

Towards the end, while she was still paying lip service to the NSA stuff, I started to sense that she wanted more than that and that of course was a no-go. The relationship ultimately ended when I met my current girlfriend (with whom I have an even _better_ sexual chemistry, amazingly enough), at which point I cut things off, pretty abruptly actually. We haven't talked since. 

Here are my thoughts overall, and a comparison of my situation to yours:

- I was coming out of a traumatic situation, and was very much still healing and making sense of it. I needed to regain my confidence, overall but also sexually, and she was the perfect outlet. 

You aren't in that sort of situation, at least not overall or at least as you've stated. You've got some chronic relationship problems. While it's ok and perhaps even prudent to take a time out to reassess and reset, I think in your situation NSA relationships are just an escape and are avoiding the problem. There's no growth involved for you. Even in my situation, it was always going to be finite. I see no plan on your part, and this in fact just sounds like an indefinite situation as you envision it. 

- I got lucky health wise. My lover was clean and had already had kids with no interest in more. She was (as far as I know) exclusive with me. 

Nowadays you just don't know what you're exposing yourself to with sex, and even the most apparently healthy or "respectable" people may be positive for something you don't want. 

- I do believe there are general gender differences in NSA sex, probably biologically as men can screw and go without worrying about their own pregnancy as a biological consequence for them. I'm probably a pretty stereotypical male in that regard, though I'm not that cavalier about the potential for pregnancy. I think women tend to want emotional attachment intertwined with their sexual relationships more than men. There are of course exceptions and YMMV. 


My suggestion to you would be to take the time out, but to focus on yourself for a while. Rededicate yourself to work and physical health (diet, exercise, etc.), but most importantly sort out why it is that your relationships have failed. I'm certain you are a major part of this, whether it be through being too closed and guarded and not trusting enough (which I suspect), poor choice of partners, etc. This sounds like a major concern you have, big enough to post the question here. Perhaps you might want to talk to a counselor about this. 

Anyway, that's my $.02.


----------



## redmanXNTP (May 17, 2011)

knittigan said:


> It's funny that you said that you can love someone that you don't see a future with because I'm exactly the opposite. I come off as very fickle when I'm initially interested in someone because I'm very unsure of my feelings as a result of constantly imagining what our future will be like; it's only when I can see a tangible future with someone that I decide it's worth the risk to proceed.


I'm the same way. 

It's clear to me that @n2freedom defined "love" quite differently from me. I can't coldly and unemotionally dump someone who I love. It's by definition impossible. Even my separation and divorce from my ex-wife who cheated on my was filled with doubt and anguish. 

I'll simply pose the open question to n2freedom as to whether you feel like you've felt genuine love before, or whether you're still trying to understand what it is.


----------



## redmanXNTP (May 17, 2011)

Runvardh said:


> Perhaps I really am good natured then. This lack frequently fuels my rage, which I irresponsibly inflict on others online, and often makes me want to burn everything around me and cause a slaughter that would soak all the dry earth in blood. It's bad enough that even animals stay away from me, so I'm sure it's also adding to the already present cockblocks I have set up.
> 
> I have thought about one night stands as a possible solution; however these would need to be quick, in a hotel room, no phone numbers, no e-mail addresses, and separate as soon as the deed is done. Even then I would have to spend the week cleaning up the oxytocin while fighting the self-loathing I'd feel. I'm pretty sure it would just make me feel worse, so there wouldn't be a point to it.


You're different from me in this regard as I'm more capable of NSA sex than you are, but our respective MBTI types are pretty good guides as to why. Neither trait is better or worse, you just have to be true to yourself and it sounds like you know yourself and your feelings well . . . in true INFP style!


----------



## n2freedom (Jun 2, 2011)

redmanXNTP said:


> I'm the same way.
> 
> It's clear to me that @n2freedom defined "love" quite differently from me. I can't coldly and unemotionally dump someone who I love. It's by definition impossible. Even my separation and divorce from my ex-wife who cheated on my was filled with doubt and anguish.
> 
> I'll simply pose the open question to n2freedom as to whether you feel like you've felt genuine love before, or whether you're still trying to understand what it is.


 Felt genuine love? Dunno. Still trying to understand what it is. It always feels like love *when* I'm feeling it but again it is not difficult for me to continue life uninterrupted when the decision is made to break it off. As far as feeling anguish and pain due to a breakup was when I divorced my ex-husband.


----------



## n2freedom (Jun 2, 2011)

redmanXNTP said:


> My suggestion to you would be to take the time out, but to focus on yourself for a while. Rededicate yourself to work and physical health (diet, exercise, etc.), but most importantly sort out why it is that your relationships have failed. I'm certain you are a major part of this, whether it be through being too closed and guarded and not trusting enough (which I suspect), poor choice of partners, etc. This sounds like a major concern you have, big enough to post the question here. Perhaps you might want to talk to a counselor about this.
> 
> 
> Anyway, that's my $.02.


 I don't see relationships in terms of success and/or failure. Relationships will do one of two things continue and/or end. Just because relationships end doesn't mean they failed. I believe people come into your life for different reasons. And, along those same veins I also believe the universe knows best what any particular person requires at any given time. 

Besides, my purpose in posting was not for Dear Abby feedback. I posted it to gauge dating, sex, relationship experiences that other NT women have had as compared to mine.


----------



## redmanXNTP (May 17, 2011)

n2freedom said:


> Felt genuine love? Dunno. Still trying to understand what it is. It always feels like love *when* I'm feeling it but again it is not difficult for me to continue life uninterrupted when the decision is made to break it off. As far as feeling anguish and pain due to a breakup was when I divorced my ex-husband.


Don't get me wrong. I'm no love guru. I'm a classic NT who struggles with that too. We're prone to intellectualizing our feelings rather than allowing ourselves to feel them. I often feel like I'm missing out on a lot of emotional experiences that, for example, my ESFJ sister has. 

I've learned a lot about love through my son. He's the first person in my life who I would ever literally sacrifice my life to protect. I've never felt anything remotely like that before. He's caused me to realize how much empathy (Fe, if you prefer - you know, that thing ranked 8th on the INTP trait scale :wink: ) love entails. I live and die with his successes and failures. 

I know that relationships with SO's is different from relationships with children (it's more of a partnership than a guardianship, for example), but I do think that I've now got a glimpse into what I was missing in my own, admittedly flawed definition of "love" when it came to my relationships.


----------



## redmanXNTP (May 17, 2011)

n2freedom said:


> I don't see relationships in terms of success and/or failure. Relationships will do one of two things continue and/or end. Just because relationships end doesn't mean they failed. I believe people come into your life for different reasons. And, along those same veins I also believe the universe knows best what any particular person requires at any given time.
> 
> Besides, my purpose in posting was not for Dear Abby feedback. I posted it to gauge dating, sex, relationship experiences that other NT women have had as compared to mine.


Fair enough. I'm apparently not as fatalistic as you about "love" (though I know full well it can't be forced and it relies a lot upon luck, though I believe we often make our own luck), and I also apparently believe that there's a lot of personal growth and fulfillment to be had with a SO with whom I can be open and loving. 

I don't say that by way of criticism, just to point out where I'm coming from and why my comments appear not to be helpful to you.


----------



## n2freedom (Jun 2, 2011)

redmanXNTP said:


> Don't get me wrong. I'm no love guru. I'm a classic NT who struggles with that too. We're prone to intellectualizing our feelings rather than allowing ourselves to feel them. I often feel like I'm missing out on a lot of emotional experiences that, for example, my ESFJ sister has.
> 
> *I've learned a lot about love through my son. He's the first person in my life who I would ever literally sacrifice my life to protect. I've never felt anything remotely like that before. He's caused me to realize how much empathy *(Fe, if you prefer - you know, that thing ranked 8th on the INTP trait scale :wink: )* love entails. I live and die with his successes and failures.*
> 
> I know that relationships with SO's is different from relationships with children (it's more of a partnership than a guardianship, for example), *but I do think that I've now got a glimpse into what I was missing in my own, admittedly flawed definition of "love" when it came to my relationships.*


 I can relate totally to what is bolded. My son has really help me to be a better person in the area of relationships indeed.


----------



## n2freedom (Jun 2, 2011)

redmanXNTP said:


> Fair enough. I'm apparently not as fatalistic as you about "love" (though I know full well it can't be forced and it relies a lot upon luck, though I believe we often make our own luck), and *I also apparently believe that there's a lot of personal growth and fulfillment to be had with a SO with whom I can be open and loving. *
> 
> I don't say that by way of criticism, just to point out where I'm coming from and why my comments appear not to be helpful to you.


 I agree wholeheartedly with the bolded part. I'm not sure what it hinges on though, maybe I am the problem, because I have yet to find someone with whom I can be open and loving.


----------



## redmanXNTP (May 17, 2011)

n2freedom said:


> I agree wholeheartedly with the bolded part. I'm not sure what it hinges on though, maybe I am the problem, because I have yet to find someone with whom I can be open and loving.


You _are_ the problem. I'm not saying that to be mean, but what I've learned is that if we don't take ownership of our struggles we won't get on top of them, and that's even more true if we're too busy laying blame for them. 

We and our traits and our choices are the one constant in our relationship struggles. I think we have to accept that we need to change in order to make our relationships change. Einstein's definition of insanity, right?


----------



## n2freedom (Jun 2, 2011)

redmanXNTP said:


> You _are_ the problem. I'm not saying that to be mean, but what I've learned is that if we don't take ownership of our struggles we won't get on top of them, and that's even more true if we're too busy laying blame for them.
> 
> We and our traits and our choices are the one constant in our relationship struggles. I think we have to accept that we need to change in order to make our relationships change. Einstein's definition of insanity, right?


 Probably so. But, it's not high on my priority list right now. ;D


----------



## Brainteaser (Jan 20, 2010)

*Sos*

I've always been a jealous type, as a result I've ruined so many wonderful opportunities 
Now I'm considering taking the more casual sex route. I figure I might as well try since I too am terrible with the whole dating and relationships thing (<---I'm sure that last sentence proves what I'm talking about lol). I think I delayed my experimenting side cause I was hoping I'd get into a serious relationship, but there is no longer any indication of that. I often misinterpret things, which is a major handicap for me; not to mention I'm not exactly all that experienced in this area.
:dry:


----------



## Dashing (Sep 19, 2011)

How does one achieve this alleged 'NSA status'?


----------



## JohnGalt (Nov 5, 2011)

I'm an NT and have been looking for a successful NSA arrangement for a while. I do like relationships, but it's probably quite a while until I actually fall in love again and I might as well have fun in the mean time. That's my rationale. Relationships are work; why be emotionally invested in someone you don't want a future with? I've been in love and committed enough in the past that I'm not interested in another relationship unless I'm totally mad about the person and see a future together. 

Most women I meet want more though so I have to end it. I've never found a woman comfortable with a regular NSA arrangement. Some are cool with a 1-time thing but don't want anything regular; others get clingy and want something emotional after a while. I would rather just meet someone looking for the same thing I am.

Where are you NT women looking for NSA and how does a guy find you? Are you only looking for certain kinds of guys (i.e. professional athletes and body builders?), or are you open-minded? What are your goals and requirements going into it?


----------



## n2freedom (Jun 2, 2011)

JohnGalt said:


> I'm an NT and have been looking for a successful NSA arrangement for a while. I do like relationships, but it's probably quite a while until I actually fall in love again and I might as well have fun in the mean time. That's my rationale. Relationships are work; why be emotionally invested in someone you don't want a future with? I've been in love and committed enough in the past that I'm not interested in another relationship unless I'm totally mad about the person and see a future together.
> 
> Most women I meet want more though so I have to end it. I've never found a woman comfortable with a regular NSA arrangement. Some are cool with a 1-time thing but don't want anything regular; others get clingy and want something emotional after a while. I would rather just meet someone looking for the same thing I am.
> 
> Where are you NT women looking for NSA and how does a guy find you? Are you only looking for certain kinds of guys (i.e. professional athletes and body builders?), or are you open-minded? What are your goals and requirements going into it?


 I can't speak for anyone else. I'm not in any place in particular. A strong sexual attraction has to be there fore me with a NSA arrangement. I can't say that I have any goals and/or requirements going into it. Except the understanding just because it's NSA does not mean a person can treat me any ole kind of way. Some men can get that twisted and try to test you in the areas of respect.

You may have better luck if you find a woman who is divorced with school aged kids. Not to say all divorced women with school aged kids are looking for NSA. But, with the demands of being a single mother....she may be more open to the idea. I'm a middle aged, divorcee, with a school aged son. My schedule doesn't really lend itself to much more. Plus, when it's time for him to go spend time with his father last thing I want to do is tie up my time again. Hope that helps.


----------



## JohnGalt (Nov 5, 2011)

n2freedom said:


> I can't speak for anyone else. I'm not in any place in particular. A strong sexual attraction has to be there fore me with a NSA arrangement. I can't say that I have any goals and/or requirements going into it. Except the understanding just because it's NSA does not mean a person can treat me any ole kind of way. Some men can get that twisted and try to test you in the areas of respect.
> 
> You may have better luck if you find a woman who is divorced with school aged kids. Not to say all divorced women with school aged kids are looking for NSA. But, with the demands of being a single mother....she may be more open to the idea. I'm a middle aged, divorcee, with a school aged son. My schedule doesn't really lend itself to much more. Plus, when it's time for him to go spend time with his father last thing I want to do is tie up my time again. Hope that helps.


Thanks for the tip off. That makes a lot of sense actually. The best arrangement I've had was with a young divorcee my age. I guess someone who's stepped out of something long-term and serious is more likely to want something casual. And with kids, it makes sense you're hesitant to jump in with someone - they would have to be long-term father material for your kids, or forget it.

I'm in my 20s, looking for someone in their 20s. Maybe that's my problem. They all want to either just hook up drunk or get married :|. But sex is honestly so much better when you get to know each other and know how to drive each other crazy, so that all gets boring. Maybe I should step out into the jungle and meet some cougars


----------



## n2freedom (Jun 2, 2011)

JohnGalt said:


> Thanks for the tip off. That makes a lot of sense actually. The best arrangement I've had was with a young divorcee my age. I guess someone who's stepped out of something long-term and serious is more likely to want something casual. And with kids, it makes sense you're hesitant to jump in with someone - they would have to be long-term father material for your kids, or forget it.
> 
> I'm in my 20s, looking for someone in their 20s. Maybe that's my problem. They all want to either just hook up drunk or get married :|. But sex is honestly so much better when you get to know each other and know how to drive each other crazy, so that all gets boring. Maybe I should step out into the jungle and meet some cougars


TBH, I didn't have the best experience with a step daddy growing up so it's not an option for me. I know we shouldn't have rules like this in our minds. But, it's just not worth the gamble for me.

LOL! Yes, cougars definitely know how to treat cubs.:wink:


----------



## redmanXNTP (May 17, 2011)

JohnGalt said:


> Thanks for the tip off. That makes a lot of sense actually. The best arrangement I've had was with a young divorcee my age. I guess someone who's stepped out of something long-term and serious is more likely to want something casual. And with kids, it makes sense you're hesitant to jump in with someone - they would have to be long-term father material for your kids, or forget it.
> 
> I'm in my 20s, looking for someone in their 20s. Maybe that's my problem. They all want to either just hook up drunk or get married :|. But sex is honestly so much better when you get to know each other and know how to drive each other crazy, so that all gets boring. Maybe I should step out into the jungle and meet some cougars


A lot of older women have fewer sexual hangups than younger women, less need for pretense or to play coy or play games to try to get some perceived advantage or to preserve the image that they're sexually virtuous. 

If you're mature and don't ask for too much, there are a lot of mid-30's and older divorced women who are out of sexually unsatisfying marriages who are looking to have fun. They'll also be a lot more adventurous than you're used to, which isn't a bad thing, and they'll of course appreciate your attention and higher energy level. 

Just don't be an asshole about it. Be discrete, especially as she defines it, be considerate of her needs in terms of how often, when and where you meet up, and don't get emotionally involved.


----------



## n2freedom (Jun 2, 2011)

redmanXNTP said:


> A lot of older women have fewer sexual hangups than younger women, less need for pretense or to play coy or play games to try to get some perceived advantage or to preserve the image that they're sexually virtuous.
> 
> If you're mature and don't ask for too much, there are a lot of mid-30's and older divorced women who are out of sexually unsatisfying marriages who are looking to have fun. They'll also be a lot more adventurous than you're used to, which isn't a bad thing, and they'll of course appreciate your attention and higher energy level.
> 
> Just don't be an asshole about it. Be discrete, especially as she defines it, be considerate of her needs in terms of how often, when and where you meet up, and don't get emotionally involved.


 BINGO!!!!! You are spot on with this information at least based on my perspective.


----------



## twoofthree (Aug 6, 2011)

I'm not an NT woman.
I can do *no strings* sex quite easily. 

As a matter of fact, I can see it becoming a 'feature' of my life in the future.

Many men can't really live up to the stereotypical image where that is concerned. A man should snatch at the chance of that kind of arrangement, but in reality most don't. They buy into emotionally much more than they let on, and much more than I do.


----------



## Aßbiscuits (Oct 8, 2009)

I'm with an INTJ, she's not a psychopath though and actually has the capacity to care for others. Just saying. Maybe it's because she's unaware of type theory and doesn't comply with how she misinterpreted the descriptions as hard as she can.


----------



## redmanXNTP (May 17, 2011)

Aßbiscuits said:


> I'm with an INTJ, she's not a psychopath though and actually has the capacity to care for others. Just saying. Maybe it's because she's unaware of type theory and doesn't comply with how she misinterpreted the descriptions as hard as she can.


Maybe it's because she's mature and relatively balanced in MBTI terms...


----------



## n2freedom (Jun 2, 2011)

Aßbiscuits said:


> I'm with an INTJ, she's not a psychopath though and actually has the capacity to care for others. Just saying. Maybe it's because she's unaware of type theory and doesn't comply with how she misinterpreted the descriptions as hard as she can.


 Is there a point this post? If so, I think I missed it. What does psychopath, misinterpreting the descriptions, or being unaware of type theory have to do with the subject of this thread? Besides do you even know what a psychopath is? There is a vast difference between not being in touch with your feelings/preferring a NSA arrangement, and having a mental disorder associated with abnormal or violent social behavior.


----------



## redmanXNTP (May 17, 2011)

n2freedom said:


> Is there a point this post? If so, I think I missed it. What does psychopath, misinterpreting the descriptions, or being unaware of type theory have to do with the subject of this thread? Besides do you even know what a psychopath is? There is a vast difference between not being in touch with your feelings/preferring a NSA arrangement, and having a mental disorder associated with abnormal or violent social behavior.


It's going to be a lot easier for everybody if you'd just stop being defensive and admit you're a psychopath.


----------



## Aßbiscuits (Oct 8, 2009)

n2freedom said:


> Is there a point this post? If so, I think I missed it. What does psychopath, misinterpreting the descriptions, or being unaware of type theory have to do with the subject of this thread? Besides do you even know what a psychopath is? There is a vast difference between not being in touch with your feelings/preferring a NSA arrangement, and having a mental disorder associated with abnormal or violent social behavior.


Yes, I know exactly what a psychopath is, which makes my post relevant. Are you patronizing me? Do you even know what patronizing is? 

Most of these "NT women" are all "I don't have feelings" blah blah blah and it's ridiculous. I'm just saying, a real NT isn't actually like that. 

I'm not even referring to having an NSA relationship, I'm responding to my observations of the NT women on this website (as opposed to the NT women I know in real life).


----------



## n2freedom (Jun 2, 2011)

redmanXNTP said:


> It's going to be a lot easier for everybody if you'd just stop being defensive and admit you're a psychopath.


 Never thought of that you're probably right. Does that mean I have stop hiding the bodies in my backyard too? LOL!


----------



## gaudy316 (Nov 19, 2010)

This thread is depressing me. I can count to 3 opportunities I had with an ENTJ, INTP, and an INTJ woman. Didn't follow through my desires to pursue them romantically because they seemed a bit cold and emotionally distant. 

...

Bottom line is, this thread makes me regret not following through. NT women have emotions after all!


----------



## Aßbiscuits (Oct 8, 2009)

gaudy316 said:


> NT women have emotions after all!


_Why would you insult them like that? _


----------



## JohnGalt (Nov 5, 2011)

n2freedom said:


> Is there a point this post? If so, I think I missed it. What does psychopath, misinterpreting the descriptions, or being unaware of type theory have to do with the subject of this thread? Besides do you even know what a psychopath is? There is a vast difference between not being in touch with your feelings/preferring a NSA arrangement, and having a mental disorder associated with abnormal or violent social behavior.


Clearly you missed the point.

I have no interest in an emotional relationship because I am a psychopath like most NTs, do not care for others, and lack any sense of empathy. This is why I want a no strings relationship, obviously. If you get attached, it's that much harder to bury the hooker in the desert.


----------



## n2freedom (Jun 2, 2011)

Aßbiscuits said:


> Yes, I know exactly what a psychopath is, which makes my post relevant. Are you patronizing me? Do you even know what patronizing is?
> 
> Most of these "NT women" are all "I don't have feelings" blah blah blah and it's ridiculous. I'm just saying, a real NT isn't actually like that.



No, I'm not patronizing you. I really thought you didn't know what one was given the context in which you used it.

Secondly, how do *you* determine a *real* NT from one who is not when the determination is based on self evaluation? 

Thirdly, I didn't get the impression any was saying they didn't have feelings. I personally said that I can love someone but attached to them. And, then I said I can love you today and depending on the situation not relate to those feelings later. Ahem....I think that indicates I do have feelings.

Fourthly, let's just say for the sake of argument that NT women within this thread area implying they don't have feelings how does that relate to anything remotely to a psychopath in which was covertly implied in your post?



Aßbiscuits said:


> I'm not even referring to having an NSA relationship, I'm responding to my observations of the NT women on this website (as opposed to the NT women I know in real life).


 Whose to say the women you know in real life are typed correctly for you to use them as the model for *real* NT women? Especially to go on a wild tangent to express opinions that implicate the possibility of someone being a sociopath. 

Now tell the truth..... you were just in the mood to troll today now weren't you?


----------



## JohnGalt (Nov 5, 2011)

Aßbiscuits said:


> _I am an S and clearly do not understand N women, especially NTs _


Spot on, I have to agree with that.


----------



## Aßbiscuits (Oct 8, 2009)

n2freedom said:


> No, I'm not patronizing you. I really thought you didn't know what one was given the context in which you used it.
> 
> Secondly, how do *you* determine a *real* NT from one who is not when the determination is based on self evaluation?
> 
> ...


Self evaluation has nothing to do with it, the result of the self evaluation is the problem. Also, have you ever heard of the forer effect? Do you know how biased people can be when they type themselves? Don't you think it's weird that when it's supposed that a small percentage of INFJs in the world most of the members on this forum type that way? 

No, I'm just fed up of people who are clueless about MBTI roleplaying what they think MBTI types are. It's honestly cringe worthy when you see people get mixed up and convince themselves they're that way, especially when they don't even realise they or others are doing it. 

All you know about my NT girlfriend is that I said she has the capacity to care about people, so, are you saying that the NT women I know in real life aren't NTs for that reason? 

It's no lie that people try to act more like their type when they find out what it is. 



JohnGalt said:


> Spot on, I have to agree with that.


Yeah, that's what this is. It's because people of different types can't understand other types, even though this theory itself was proposed by one man. This is because I don't understand NT women, right, not because they don't understand the theory or anything crazy like that when about 1% of this forum actually does. 

Now, without using the you're-not-an-NT (God forbid a_ sensor_ understand a glorious and complicated individual) or you're "trolling" cards, does anyone want to disagree with this? That people get delusional about their types after learning about the theory? If so, back it up or let's drop it. I was just making a small observation out of annoyance.

*LOL. Just read your other post. I am not making a connection between NSA relationships and psychopathy, don't be ridiculous.*


----------



## n2freedom (Jun 2, 2011)

JohnGalt said:


> Clearly you missed the point.
> 
> I have no interest in an emotional relationship because I am a psychopath like most NTs, do not care for others, and lack any sense of empathy. This is why I want a no strings relationship, obviously. If you get attached, it's that much harder to bury the hooker in the desert.


 Gotcha! Now I see what you mean. Dangit!! Can't believe I missed that one.:wink:


----------



## n2freedom (Jun 2, 2011)

Aßbiscuits said:


> Self evaluation has nothing to do with it, the result of the self evaluation is the problem. Also, have you ever heard of the forer effect? Do you know how biased people can be when they type themselves? Don't you think it's weird that when it's supposed that a small percentage of INFJs in the world most of the members on this forum type that way?


 Really? Self-evaluation doesn't? Then who input the answers to determine the type? Self And, how does one decide which answer? By evaluating self. So, in other words it's subjective. Now, I will ask you the same question again.....how do *you *determine a *real* NT when it is based on self evaluation??



Aßbiscuits said:


> No, I'm just fed up of people who are clueless about MBTI roleplaying what they think MBTI types are. It's honestly cringe worthy when you see people get mixed up and convince themselves they're that way, especially when they don't even realise they or others are doing it.


 I agree this does appear to happen. But, how do you *know* when someone is doing this? In my opinion, all you can do is ASSume. And, again I think it is a bit much to go on the tangent in which you did to try to somehow link it to sociopaths. 


Aßbiscuits said:


> All you know about my NT girlfriend is that I said she has the capacity to care about people, so, are you saying that the NT women I know in real life aren't NTs for that reason?


 Don't try to flip this back on me....Stick with the question I asked you....You made ALL of the emphatic statements ...not me. So, back to my original question..._"Whose to say the women you know in real life are typed correctly for you to use them as the model for *real* NT women? Especially to go on a wild tangent to express opinions that implicate the possibility of someone being a sociopath."_



Aßbiscuits said:


> It's no lie that people try to act more like their type when they find out what it is.


 Some do and some don't. Still does not answer my questions that I posed to you.... _"How do *you* determine a *real* NT from one who is not when the determination is based on self evaluation?"_


Aßbiscuits said:


> Yeah, that's what this is. It's because people of different types can't understand other types, even though this theory itself was proposed by one man. This is because I don't understand NT women, right, not because they don't understand the theory or anything crazy like that when about 1% of this forum actually does.


 But you can infer that you determine a *real* NT from one who is perpetrating?


Aßbiscuits said:


> Now, without using the you're-not-an-NT (God forbid a_ sensor_ understand a glorious and complicated individual) or you're I'm "trolling" cards, does anyone want to disagree with this? That people get delusional about their types after learning about the theory? If so, back it up or let's drop it.


 I agree that SOME people can buy into stereotypes and act them out after learning about the theory. However, I also believe some people do not. Nonetheless, it has very little to do with the preposterous implication using covert references to sociopaths.


----------



## Aßbiscuits (Oct 8, 2009)

n2freedom said:


> Really? Self-evaluation doesn't? Then who input the answers to determine the type? Self And, how does one decide which answer? By evaluating self. So, in other words it's subjective. Now, I will ask you the same question again.....how do *you *determine a *real* NT when it is based on self evaluation??


I type them with the 2 years of knowledge of Jung I have. What, doing an MBTI test would determine it better? Really? I'm an MBTI INTJ, funnily enough, how different are INTJs from ESTPs? Very different. But with MBTI functions and descriptions, xNTJ couldn't fit me better. I bet if my gf were to look at the right information she'd come to the same conclusion. She did a shitty MBTI, though she was hardly interested, and scored ENTJ, but honestly, I think she uses too much Ni and Fi for that. For example (and this is how I type, you can see if it's effective or not with me using her as an example). At first I did see the Te, she would avoid talking to someone she didn't like, small talk etc. seeing it as unproductive, how would it pay off in anyway? 

Then, I started to see how much she asked me to recheck things, look at things from several different angles when I didn't understand the point she was making. She thought everything has an answer, we just can't see it yet (if her Se and Te were more developed, her attitude would be "things can't be explained, they just are that way, they're the facts, let's deal with them and be more productive). Another time she said to me "I don't want to be right, I want to be understood" as a female going into her twenties, this is Fi creeping into her life. Then I got to know her better, and got used to her abhorrence towards socialising and being friendly I also got to know why. 

She explained to me why she didn't like social interaction that much, it wasn't only the Te thing, it was a combination of Te and Fi (too much for it to be inferior), she said "well, I should be allowed to act how I like, it's my life", this is a clear indication of the rebellious Fi creepin'. Do you think someone who just figured out about the MBTI would be able to determine that? Plus, as I said, people are scarily subjective, to the point of being delusional. I'm against typing others, I will give my opinion and utilize the theory, but I think you need to know someone really well to type them or you have to be extremely honest with yourself. The subconscious exists for a reason -- because people aren't extremely honest with themselves. 



> I agree this does appear to happen. But, how do you *know* when someone is doing this?


First of all, it's obvious because they got some ungrounded misconception about the theory and then went on to act it out, as if they were really that way. That's a clear indication. 

And then I usually know it's happening when women claim to be robots, unfeeling etc. I understand it too, you know, how comforting it is to know other women aren't extremely feminine and overemotional. But this is like the other side of the spectrum and completely overdone. It's almost satirical. This thread isn't the perfect example, but it is one (that's currently being derailed), if I was to say this anywhere else though (like in the INTJ or INTP subform) I'd get a load of biased people, for obvious reasons, not taking it in, just arguing with it. Plus, those threads are so bad I just don't read them any more.

*NOW. I WROTE A REALLY LONG POST.*


----------



## JohnGalt (Nov 5, 2011)

Aßbiscuits said:


> Now, without using the you're-not-an-NT (God forbid a_ sensor_ understand a glorious and complicated individual) or you're "trolling" cards, does anyone want to disagree with this? That people get delusional about their types after learning about the theory? If so, back it up or let's drop it. I was just making a small observation out of annoyance.
> 
> *LOL. Just read your other post. I am not making a connection between NSA relationships and psychopathy, don't be ridiculous.*


*Some* people get illusions about their types and subconsciously (or consciously) modify their behaviour to try to fit that mould more, sure. Generalizing that to a majority is a big leap. Generalizing that most NT women who want to fit their "type description" try to act like "psychopaths" is a stretch. Interpreting that the "cold" front they present is "psychopathic" or even "sociopathic" behaviour is misinterpreting the image they are actually trying to present. I'm not talking about whether or not they actually have emotions; I'm just talking about what they're trying to show. Maybe you see them trying to be robots. I see them showing plenty of feeling, as PART of the act. Nihilism is still a belief you know, not a lack of belief.

Maybe the nuance is just easier for an Ne to pick up? I don't know. I don't want to generalize about type. I will simply state that I have heard people (of unknown type) make comments about NTs trying to act feelingless when *I* see a lot of emotion out of them, and I don't see them trying to hide it - maybe just express it in an "unconventional" way. I've heard countless people critique some NT authors for lacking emotion in their writing, when I find they often evoke the most passion and strongest feelings out of me. Since the majority of North Americans are Ss and the majority of women are Fs, I think our cultural stereotyped "norm" is rooted in how an SF woman would act. But unless you use that as your benchmark, there is no reason to assume NTs are trying to be "cold" or "unfeeling" perse.

PS - It seems you missed the sarcasm in my posts. I was clearly trying to lighten the thread up and make n2freedom laugh a bit ;-)
Not everything has to be factual.


----------



## Aßbiscuits (Oct 8, 2009)

JohnGalt said:


> .


I'm not generalising all NT females, I'm generalising the ones who say they're emotionless. But, to be honest, let's look at it this way. If they're showing an obvious misunderstanding in the theory but believing or pretending they're this way, how likely is it they're, all of them, honest with themselves? 

Except this is completely on-the-nose stuff. They outright say they're robotic, so this has nothing to do with tone or register. 

How would it be easier for an Ne user to pick up on? NTs consist of Ni users too, obviously. Ne is extremely similar to Se and I use Ni and you don't.

Well, my need for everything to be factual comes from my Ti, not my Se, a function we both share in common.


----------



## Vexilla Regis (May 4, 2011)

I have only loved a few men. I have never been able to find or have a love switch. Though, I do have a silly switch. I will tell you this much, I am someone who requires a lot of space. 

Dating for me was a disaster. Most of the men felt as though they were being tested and/or interviewed. They were correct.


----------



## Vexilla Regis (May 4, 2011)

Oh, and I do have feelings. I even cry a few times every few years. My kids were leaving for college. 
I have emotions, it just so happens I was taught to not show them as a youngster.


----------



## Aßbiscuits (Oct 8, 2009)

Mountain Climber said:


> Oh, and I do have feelings. I even cry a few times every few years. My kids were leaving for college.
> I have emotions, it just so happens I was taught to not show them as a youngster.


Every few years? lol I cry when I stub my toe off something. 

Do you think this is why you ended up being an enneagram six? Just curious. As enneagram is focused on nurture and I've seen this as a common theme amongst sixes.


----------



## The Proof (Aug 5, 2009)

I'm awesome at relationships and I should be as I'm using MBTI to make them work, among other systems. Empty sex does *not* satisfy, I always want a relationship, so it's either a relationship or forget it, which some girls can't handle.

So the only thing that has hurt my relationships thus far has been a lack of quality in the opposite sex, not counting relationships I ended because we were not a good fit, but otherwise good, effective people.


----------



## JohnGalt (Nov 5, 2011)

Aßbiscuits said:


> I'm not generalising all NT females, I'm generalising the ones who say they're emotionless. But, to be honest, let's look at it this way. If they're showing an obvious misunderstanding in the theory but believing or pretending they're this way, how likely is it they're, all of them, honest with themselves?
> 
> Except this is completely on-the-nose stuff. They outright say they're robotic, so this has nothing to do with tone or register.
> 
> ...


Hmm.. I disagree. Ti is logic. S is more about concrete facts, particularly literal interpretations. And I might be wrong about this, but I believe Ne is supposed to lend itself towards being more intuitive about others. 

I know I find INTJs and INFJs (Ni doms) pretty easy to understand when most people tend miss their subtlety and see these same people as closed off or enigmas. This may or may not have anything to do with type.

"Emotionless" is relative. They are clearly saying it contrast themselves with stereotypical SF women - the majority. They intend it as hyperbole, not to imply that they are actually truly devoid of emotion. They just don't want to fit the SF cultural norm because that is not who they are. In fact, SAYING they are emotionless is actually expressing an emotion - their frustration with traditional gender roles, their contempt towards some SF women, etc. And there is no attempt to hide any of that sentiment. They are just trying to assert they are different from the Western female stereotype. At least, that's how I intrepret such behaviour.


----------



## gaudy316 (Nov 19, 2010)

Oh how you NT's just LOVE to debate. 

Curious, how can any guy (for example: mid-20s, not physically imposing, tall, lanky, slim, verbally reserved, not too fashionable) successfully approach an NT stranger or acquaintance and end up having an NSA relationship some time down the road?


----------



## Vexilla Regis (May 4, 2011)

Aßbiscuits said:


> Every few years? lol I cry when I stub my toe off something.
> 
> Do you think this is why you ended up being an enneagram six? Just curious. As enneagram is focused on nurture and I've seen this as a common theme amongst sixes.


Hmmm, I'm not sure.
FYI- I taught my four kids to let it all out. When I didn't want to hear them, I told them to go into their bedrooms or the woods.


----------



## redmanXNTP (May 17, 2011)

n2freedom said:


> Now, I have already told you about your shameless plugs and I know you don't like the concept of the "other woman" so damnit...STOP IT!!! LMAO


Yes, I've made myself clear on the issue of the other woman. 

I have some different views on the issue of another women, however. :wink:


----------



## quadrivium (Nov 6, 2011)

redmanXNTP said:


> Why would you assume good proficiency at this immediately? Most people suck at golf the first time out too. Practice makes perfect . . .


I wasn't assuming I would be immediately good in bed. I assumed I would feel differently about life in general after losing my virginity.


----------



## redmanXNTP (May 17, 2011)

corgiflatmate said:


> I wasn't assuming I would be immediately good in bed. I assumed I would feel differently about life in general after losing my virginity.


The sun wasn't shining, the breeze wasn't blowing, the birds weren't singing, the bees weren't buzzing...?


----------



## quadrivium (Nov 6, 2011)

redmanXNTP said:


> The sun wasn't shining, the breeze wasn't blowing, the birds weren't singing, the bees weren't buzzing...?


Nope. Hollywood has been lying to me all these years! Lol


----------



## TheBoss (Oct 27, 2011)

n2freedom said:


> Like I said, I suck at relationships..... How has dating, sex, and relationships been for you?


Has been easy. 

I don't do 'casual'. Only long term relationships.
Being in relationship with me is an all inclusive and absolutely exclusive deal. Facts stated early on so whoever wants to walk, may do so.
I proceed slowly and character is the utmost I look for in a male. Followed by brains and physical energy (<- SO very sexy that).

As a mediterranean, 'so and so' is just not good enough for me. We have passion and we expect passion and even drama and feelings exploding. Being too calm, too unemotional, shows problems. Either indifference or mental syndromes. We tend to consider too self controlled people as pitifully lacking several things (and probably certain 'abilities' too). Gladly were I live, we get too few of those. 
Hell, if I wanted to 'sleep' with animated corpses, I'd visit morgues instead, to perform dark rituals. 

Ahhhhh...those amazing sex-induced hormones that not only make one feel good but also fill us with energy. Ain't they great? ^^

Metaphorically speaking, *beds* are supposed to be 'set on fire'*. Preferably multiple times per day if conditions allow it. 
That, and total hygiene are the two things I am adamant about. Aside those, there are no roads blocked, no caves unexplored, no "no's", no 'impossibles', between me and my man. 3rd parties are not welcome. :happy: 

Btw,


n2freedom said:


> Does that mean I have stop hiding the bodies in my backyard too? LOL!


I saw that! Got any free space left? You know I am facing some logistic issues lately. :laughing:



*or floors/walls/cars/rooftops/you_name_it


----------



## C. Cal. MindTraipse (Nov 13, 2011)

n2freedom said:


> However, I have found that most men I have been sexually involved with don't handle *real* sex with no strings attached" arrangements very well. My first question is if you have been in a *real* sex with no strings attached arrangements? Has it gone smoothly for you?
> 
> Secondly, I can love someone and not get emotionally attached, not invest in them emotionally, and not want to be in a relationship with them. In other words, I can love a man but not see a future with him. Therefore, I'm only going to allow myself to go so far with him. Can you relate to this?
> 
> Lastly, it seems to me being in love is like some type of switch with me. I can love you today and basically decide to leave you tomorrow if the situation calls for it. I'll feel hurt for about 3 days....ten at the most and I'm pretty much over it and prepared to get on with life. Am I alone when it comes to "love"?


Firstly, I'm not a woman, but everything you say rings true for me. I took a break from relationships three years ago (to be honest, I gave up) when I was nineteen, but have somewhat partaken in the ‘no strings attached’ arrangements, though it almost never works out as planned. Strings seem to appear out of nowhere, like incarnations of non sequitur. It’s absolutely baffling. It’s as if before it happens, it’s only about sex and all is a go, but afterwards, the act of sex has in and of itself changed everything. 

I think the best way to prearrange the ‘no strings attached’ relationship is to generally avoid F’s, but this is just my experience. I can’t call out all F’s, just as I can’t say all NT’s won’t deviate from course, that an NT won’t attach strings when the nature of the ‘relationship’ was previously agreed upon as mutually sexually beneficial, and NOT emotionally stimulating. Also, I think that if it is going to be a 'long term' thing, such as friends with benefits, then it should be specified that while the relationship is based unemotionally on sex, that doesn’t necessarily mean that it is ‘meaningless sex.’ Sex can be hugely meaningful simply as a physical expression of human instinct, and enjoying the human things, and appreciating the bodily aesthetics of the opposite sex (or the same sex, or both sexes, depending on your preference).

So no, the ‘no stings’ deal has never gone smoothly for me, but that’s probably because I can’t seem to take my own advice. I enjoy 1:1 time with the girls I become friends with, but for me it is rarely sexual. At first, when I noticed their ‘sexual’ interest, I would try to be logical and explain to her that while I’m not sexually interested, I can be sexually compliant and see where it goes, as I’m open to new things, but in all cases that was obviously a huge mistake. I gave in because I valued the friendship and didn’t want to lose it by backing off, as it’s often hard to be friends when you tell someone you don’t think of her the way she feels about you. I’ve basically avoided sexual relationships for the past year because it always seems like I’m letting the person down by doing exactly what we agreed upon—not giving into feelings. So I FEEL like a huge asshole, while I THINK I am technically in the right.

On your second point, I do the same thing. Oftentimes, when the ‘no strings’ relationship turns into a lengthy series of one night stands and daytime meet-ups, I find that I do love the girl, but that doesn't mean I have fallen I love with her. I’ll love everything about her: being with her, spending time with her, holding her hand even (at her request, which I agree to after clarifying that I’m doing so only because I do, in fact, like holding hands, and which has nothing to do with emotional affection)...but I’m not IN LOVE with her. Since I’m not in love I can only go far—and too far is discussing feelings and emotions, or any talk of the future. So I definitely relate to this.

I also have the switch. I think of it like this: I love you, but that doesn’t mean I have to be around you; that doesn’t mean I need to talk to you on the phone or call or text; and that doesn’t mean I’ll stop loving if we go the rest of our lives never seeing one another again—that love does not and should not have such requirements as time and space. If I love you, I love you, and almost nothing is going to change that. It’s a cold, hard fact. Although no one really gets this, and I’m asked: hypothetically, if you loved me, then wouldn’t you want to call me and be with me and do super gay things like snuggling? In which case I have to explain the different sorts of love, making distinctions between the appearance of love, and what IS love. But the switch DOESN’T pertain to the incredibly rare girl that I fall head over heels for, almost instantaneously. That love is almost beyond love, like passionate agape—but at the same time very rational, and yet, doubly, entirely illogical. The last girl I dated, this happened with—and I still love her as much and more as the first time I saw/met her.

So I’m not really sure what I’m getting at, but what I do know is that while a ‘no strings’ relationship is difficult to puppeteer, good things can come from it. One of my best friends is a girl who this happened with (although the terms were never clear) and after the ‘sex break up,’ and after several months of handwritten letters, we managed to realize that with or without sex, we made great friends. So that is what we became.


----------



## redmanXNTP (May 17, 2011)

C. Cal. MindTraipse said:


> I also have the switch. I think of it like this: I love you, but that doesn’t mean I have to be around you; that doesn’t mean I need to talk to you on the phone or call or text; and that doesn’t mean I’ll stop loving if we go the rest of our lives never seeing one another again—that love does not and should not have such requirements as time and space. If I love you, I love you, and almost nothing is going to change that. It’s a cold, hard fact. Although no one really gets this, and I’m asked: hypothetically, if you loved me, then wouldn’t you want to call me and be with me and do super gay things like snuggling? In which case I have to explain the different sorts of love, making distinctions between the appearance of love, and what IS love. But the switch DOESN’T pertain to the incredibly rare girl that I fall head over heels for, almost instantaneously. That love is almost beyond love, like passionate agape—but at the same time very rational, and yet, doubly, entirely illogical. The last girl I dated, this happened with—and I still love her as much and more as the first time I saw/met her.


In other words, NT's can compartmentalize both our sexual lives from our emotional lives, and we can also compartmentalize our work life from our personal life. We have to remind ourselves that this is abnormal and that most others not only don't operate this way, they can't conceive of operating this way. 

In terms of NSA sex, yes, definitely stay away from the strong Fi's. Unless they've got other issues going on, they won't sleep with you unless they want something more. You're only going to hurt them if you take advantage of that.


----------



## C. Cal. MindTraipse (Nov 13, 2011)

redmanXNTP said:


> In terms of NSA sex, yes, definitely stay away from the strong Fi's. Unless they've got other issues going on, they won't sleep with you unless they want something more. You're only going to hurt them if you take advantage of that.


Yes, that's what I wanted to say, but I didn't know how.


----------



## n2freedom (Jun 2, 2011)

C. Cal. MindTraipse said:


> I also have the switch. I think of it like this: I love you, but that doesn’t mean I have to be around you; that doesn’t mean I need to talk to you on the phone or call or text; and that doesn’t mean I’ll stop loving if we go the rest of our lives never seeing one another again—that love does not and should not have such requirements as time and space. If I love you, I love you, and almost nothing is going to change that. It’s a cold, hard fact. Although no one really gets this, and I’m asked: hypothetically, if you loved me, then wouldn’t you want to call me and be with me and do super gay things like snuggling? In which case I have to explain the different sorts of love, making distinctions between the appearance of love, and what IS love. But the switch DOESN’T pertain to the incredibly rare girl that I fall head over heels for, almost instantaneously. That love is almost beyond love, like passionate agape—but at the same time very rational, and yet, doubly, entirely illogical. The last girl I dated, this happened with—and I still love her as much and more as the first time I saw/met her.
> 
> So I’m not really sure what I’m getting at, but what I do know is that while a ‘no strings’ relationship is difficult to puppeteer, good things can come from it. One of my best friends is a girl who this happened with (although the terms were never clear) and after the ‘sex break up,’ and after several months of handwritten letters, we managed to realize that with or without sex, we made great friends. So that is what we became.


 I totally get where you are coming from when you talk about your switch and love.


----------



## redmanXNTP (May 17, 2011)

C. Cal. MindTraipse said:


> Yes, that's what I wanted to say, but I didn't know how.


Cool. Glad I could contribute to the collaborative wisdom that is the message board.


----------



## C. Cal. MindTraipse (Nov 13, 2011)

Mountain Climber said:


> We robots are the children of men who would spank us and then tell us, "don't cry or I'll give you something to REALLY cry about."
> My Dad was so strict. He would have me vacuum our living room or my bedroom, and then go in for his inspection. He would see a speck of dust, instead of simply picking it up and placing it in the trash, he would have me vacuum the whole entire room again. I can give you a hundred examples like these from my childhood.
> 
> I was the tough tomboy girl. My Dad would spank me, I mean REALLY spank me and say that thing he said. I would look him in the eye afterwards and say, "that did not hurt."


Interesting. Do you know what type your dad is? Mine sounds just like him, who's a hardcore ESTJ military man.


----------



## n2freedom (Jun 2, 2011)

redmanXNTP said:


> In other words, NT's can compartmentalize both our sexual lives from our emotional lives, and we can also compartmentalize our work life from our personal life. We have to remind ourselves that this is abnormal and that most others not only don't operate this way, they can't conceive of operating this way.
> 
> In terms of NSA sex, yes, definitely stay away from the strong Fi's. Unless they've got other issues going on, they won't sleep with you unless they want something more. You're only going to hurt them if you take advantage of that.


 You keep this up and I'm going to be *a*nother woman.:wink: *giggling*

PS. What is abnormal vs normal anyway? If it was more NTs then it would be normal. LMAO!:laughing:


----------



## redmanXNTP (May 17, 2011)

n2freedom said:


> You keep this up and I'm going to be *a*nother woman.:wink: *giggling*
> 
> PS. What is abnormal vs normal anyway? If it was more NTs then it would be normal. LMAO!:laughing:


:wink:

Honestly, it's one of our least human traits to be so emotionally compartmentalized. It's useful in a crisis as it allows us to still function - a great asset - but it's almost frightening how detached we can be. 

It's bizarre how if I'm at work and see someone I know, even know well, outside the work context I'll almost not recognize them. It's worlds colliding. SJ's, for example, recognize people right away and keep right on going with a warm greeting. I find myself feeling awkward and resenting the "intrustion". 

As for the sex, it's predatorial when you think about it - no real empathy. How can something as intimate at sex be treated virtually like it's a transaction, or something to be consumed like a meal? "Ah, that was a nice meal. Ok, let's get the afternoon started..."

There's no changing it fundamentally - it's hard wired - but I've definitely become more aware of these traits as a parent and tried to moderate them.


----------



## redmanXNTP (May 17, 2011)

C. Cal. MindTraipse said:


> Interesting. Do you know what type your dad is? Mine sounds just like him, who's an hardcore ESTJ military man.


What type? I was going to guess asshole sadist, but I can't seem to find a subforum for that one.


----------



## n2freedom (Jun 2, 2011)

redmanXNTP said:


> :wink:
> 
> Honestly, it's one of our least human traits to be so emotionally compartmentalized. It's useful in a crisis as it allows us to still function - a great asset - but it's almost frightening how detached we can be.
> 
> ...


 Very well said. I never thought about the work thing. But, I do that quite often. And, have caught flack and/or attitude for not recognizing them and/or showing visible signs of impatience with the small talk. LOL! Funny and strange but I definitely do that. SMH


----------



## C. Cal. MindTraipse (Nov 13, 2011)

redmanXNTP said:


> It's bizarre how if I'm at work and see someone I know, even know well, outside the work context I'll almost not recognize them. It's worlds colliding. SJ's, for example, recognize people right away and keep right on going with a warm greeting. I find myself feeling awkward and resenting the "intrustion".


Yes, and if I'm working and I run into a good friend, or even a family member, I won't associate them with my work world--and they'll ask why I'm acting different.


----------



## redmanXNTP (May 17, 2011)

C. Cal. MindTraipse said:


> Yes, and if I'm working and I run into a good friend, or even a family member, I won't associate them with my work world--and they'll ask why I'm acting different.


"Because you don't belong here."


----------



## C. Cal. MindTraipse (Nov 13, 2011)

redmanXNTP said:


> "Because you don't belong here."


To which they reply: "But I thought..."


----------



## redmanXNTP (May 17, 2011)

C. Cal. MindTraipse said:


> To which they reply: "But I thought..."


*stern look*


----------



## Vexilla Regis (May 4, 2011)

C. Cal. MindTraipse said:


> Interesting. Do you know what type your dad is? Mine sounds just like him, who's a hardcore ESTJ military man.


 You know, I don't know what type he is. I just read an ESTJ profile, which sounds just like my Dad. Nevering sparing the rod, always enforcing the rules... Hardcore military man. Thirty five years in the military. Works passionately on his family-tree for fun on Friday nights...


----------



## C. Cal. MindTraipse (Nov 13, 2011)

Mountain Climber said:


> You know, I don't know what type he is. I just read an ESTJ profile, which sounds just like my Dad. Nevering sparing the rod, always enforcing the rules... Hardcore military man. Thirty five years in the military. Works passionately on his family-tree for fun on Friday nights...


Yep, our dad's are pretty much the military ESTJ standard. Mine spends his free time finding and fixing every innocuous bellyache in the household, whether it's a tiny scuff in the hardwood floor, or a door hinge that needs to be polished and greased. That, or he's playing with wood in the basement. I mean, he has his good qualities, but he generally drives me insane with how much he cares about the stupid things. And everything has to be his way even when I explain that his way doesn't make any sense at all. You could probably get him to take the test. My dad was all about it when I explained it in a certain way, although he had no interest in reading about his type.


----------



## boogerbetty (Nov 22, 2011)

C. Cal. MindTraipse said:


> So I’m not really sure what I’m getting at, but what I do know is that while a ‘no strings’ relationship is difficult to puppeteer, good things can come from it. One of my best friends is a girl who this happened with (although the terms were never clear) and after the ‘sex break up,’ and after several months of handwritten letters, we managed to realize that with or without sex, we made great friends. So that is what we became.


The handwritten letters are key. To all troubles I swear.


----------



## redmanXNTP (May 17, 2011)

C. Cal. MindTraipse said:


> Yep, our dad's are pretty much the military ESTJ standard... *And everything has to be his way even when I explain that his way doesn't make any sense at al*l...


Is there a more stereotypical basis for dispute between SJ's and NT's than this?


----------



## Isis (Jul 8, 2010)

redmanXNTP said:


> Is there a more stereotypical basis for dispute between SJ's and NT's than this?


I find the ST mindset scary because it sort of sounds logical but it's based on bunches of weird discrete facts that might not work together.


----------



## jeremiahpuppybeast (Oct 6, 2011)

redmanXNTP said:


> I agree on the NF-Soulmate, NT-Mindmate general framework, but I think you're short-changing an NT's emotions with sex. While perhaps not hung up on the morality or romance of sex as much as others, NT's (like me) can find the Sensing world of sex to be a uniquely intimate time with their partner, and also a short time when that Ne machine gets shut off and they stay in the moment. It's wonderful.
> 
> Now, in true NT fashion I've found myself "studying" sex over the years, refining what I do and adapting to each partner based upon what I've learned about women in general, about myself, and about my partner. It's made me a better lover, which in turn has only heightened that Sensing experience I referenced above.
> 
> In some sense it's behavioral psychology at work- if you _act_ intimate, you can feel more intimate.


This:
The Social Neuroscience of Empathy - Jean Decety - Google Books

I totally agree with everything you've said here. Sex, for me, is a "reset button" of sorts, and it's virtually the _only_ time I'm really present in the moment and experiencing things on a sensory level without some divided attention going to my endless streaming of divergent and correlating thoughts. 

I'm a big believer in sex as an intimate way of connecting with a partner on a neuropsychological level, which inherently increases your bond with them, whether you intended to or not. For this reason, I've always tried to avoid the "no strings" sex outside of the odd one-night encounter, which I've never been a big fan of anyway, b/c I can't really enjoy it fully when there's not some established comfort level, which makes it seem like settling for a lesser-than experience. Perhaps that's a result of my introverted judging personality not being contented with experiences that are sub-par by my standards. I loathe superficiality. :dry:


----------



## julia_irrlicht (Nov 12, 2011)

I guess, I would lose respect to myself, if I engage in casual sex. Not that I'm a puritan or need emotional engagement but it would be a sign that this is the only thing I'm good for in his eyes. Although "fuck buddy" was a perfect relationship for me - full trust, common topics, no jealousy, no expectations, no over-dreaming, just being yourself. It lasted happily two years, then he moved to a different continent, no more sex but still a good friendship and conversations via Skype. 

Now it's different. I became lazy and ready to be with anyone, who more or less meets my requirements on education, career status (=equal or better than me financially due to own hard work) and shows at least some rationality + like me strong enough that can care about totally impractical me. Nice ISTP guy. I don't know, if he loves me and I don't really care. I like that he's practical and can help to arrange my life, so I'm not floating in a perfect world of strategies, which helped to make a career but made me an impractical dreamer. He says, he's proud of me, I'm so interesting and can advertise Pantene and mini skirts, so probably there's something, I can offer, too, and it's fair. I can marry him, if he wants. Why not? I like his practical attitude to life and that he understands, I need periods on my own, like this weekend of introspection and surfing on forums. Maybe, now he sleeps with someone else (oh, Sensors). Doesn't matter. Majority of his free time is spent with me anyway, so I'm winning anyway. 

Maybe, I'll fell in love with him when I'm totally cured after almost three years of loving a married man (shit). Tried to understand and rationalize it but couldn't. Still having dreams that I'm running through a minefield, risking my life to save him. Even learnt lucid dreaming but it doesn't help in case of a minefield as in this lucid state I still want to run through a minefield. Plus when I'm getting drunk, I start to analyze again, why he chose her. He says, I'm smart, interesting and laughts at my jokes. He says, she's histrionic and only cares about housework. I even look better. Love is really irrational.


----------



## shadowofambivalence (May 11, 2011)

I mostly like men as freinds, Im not too sure about a relationship with one becasue i always feel akward and stressed in one and I have a hard time expressing feelings even if i do feel them strong enough be be dizzy. Casual sex is fine as long as there is condom use and a mutual trust between myself and the other person. I also like to causualy date every once in a while just for the social experience and to also get myself out of the house besides just visiting my family or going to work.


----------

