Controlling people

[INA]

IF3157, do controlling people try to control you personally?

Not usually, but on occasion I butt heads with them. I would not call myself the least controlling person, either, but I respect people's boundaries and space.

 

[Virtual ghost]

It is very egotistical. Being able to foresee and plan, why don't you have contingencies for if they fuck up- control your options? Absent reason (e.g. prior acts) that they will fuck up, why meddle?
In short, where do you get off?

As people in my country say " It is better to prevent then heal"

It is possible that they will fuck up I the way every one will fuck up on the differnt way so you have a mess

Why meddle?

Because you are part of the team so they can damage you or other team members. Also my TJ part is hard to miss so many people are counting that I will be on alert all the time. But this is another story.

It is all about efficacity.

I will presume that you have read "What do you think about me" thread.
One of the main reason why I must be more social is to gain more independence. To get that you need flexibility,what total introversion can't give you. You gain flexibility by having more options and you have more options by having bigger impact on people. What in the end leads to some controling behaviour.

How to command other people in the way that they don't see it as a problem is another thing.

 

[INA]

Why meddle?

Because you are part of the team so they can damage you or other team members. Also my TJ part is hard to miss so many people are counting that you will be on alert all the time. But this is another story.

It is all about efficacity.

Put yourself in the shoes of the girl I described. There's no team. Imagine that I'm not usually late. Now explain.

I will presume that you have read "What do you think about me" thread..

I haven't, actually.

You gain flexibility by having more options and you have more options by having bigger impact on people. What in the end leads to some controling behaviour.

How to comand other people in the way that they don't see it as a problem is another thing.

So people are little toy soldiers without any will of their own to you? Or does it not matter in either case if they do?

 

[Virtual ghost]

Put yourself in the shoes of the girl I described. There's no team. Imagine that I'm not usually late. Now explain.


So people are little toy soldiers without any will of their own to you? Or does it not matter in either case if they do?

You mean on the breakfast case.
I am looking all over the thread and I am not sure on what do you mean.


No, that is the stereotype about people like me which is not true in many cases. Good strategist pays a lot of attention that it is not too bossy and they value opinion of other people.

 

[Virtual ghost]

If you are talking about the phone thing that is stupid move from her side.

But to tell you the truth I need wider context to give you my opinion.

 

[Eric B]

A natural proclivity to control might be tied to extraversion, and especially pragmatism (Keirsey's temperament facet). After all, in both cases you are approaching another person and bearing influence. Also, role-directing and structure focus will also seem controlling, but both are more reactive.

This would be illustrated in one of Horney's Coping Strategies:

Moving Against:
The individual threatens those perceived as a threat to avoid getting hurt.

"Moving Towards" would be more of extraversion, and this can be in either a friendly or unfriendly stance.

So E-TJ's will tend to be controlling, and I-TJ's will, but in a more passive way. Other T's or J's will also have some controlling traits. "Controlling" can also be manipulation to meet some need, who otherwise would not control others.

To make sure, I had started the NF discussion on whether that group has "control" issues, and sure enough; they said they generally don't, though they can react when values are violated. Makes me still wonder how people like Hitler seem to end up being classed as NF, though. He generally is the epitome of "controlling", and of the classic "Choleric" temperament. (People seem to see him as operating off of a value system, but I don't think that was his preferred judgment).

 

[Virtual ghost]

IF3157 tell me one thing. Was that breakfast important because of something or it was just a breakfast?

 

[INA]

Ooh, sorry. missed all this.
It was just a breakfast. Nothing important. That was just one example of her controlling antics.

Eric, now that I think about it in MBTI terms, she does fit ENTJ a lot.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Ooh, sorry. missed all this.
It was just a breakfast. Nothing important. That was just one example of her controlling antics.

Eric, now that I think about it in MBTI terms, she does fit ENTJ a lot.

Try with ENTJ.

 

[Grayscale]

i dont want you to make threads like this in the future... got that?

 

[INA]

Try with ENTJ.

Perhaps

i dont want you to make threads like this in the future... got that?

 

[Grayscale]

i was being ironic!

damnit, now i feel bad :sad:

 

[Jack Flak]

I'm 100% certain she knew that. Mhehe.

 

[Kaizer]

*gets out handcuffs*

Hey, get back here, you!

.. you're probably right.
But I realize I do have a few values.
One is that I believe possession of another (i.e., domination) is evil personified.
(Probably because it negates choice and thus negates love.)

On the contrary, you have to trust someone to allow them to possess you. And trust breeds love.

No, that is not "possession" as I refer to it.
You cannot "own" another person.
Existentially, the truth is we're all completely separate and solely responsible for our own choices.
(although sometimes we lie to ourselves so as to avoid responsibility for our decisions and/or to avoid the loneliness of being inherently separate)

Even with what you describe, you are still in charge of yourself because you CHOOSE to place yourself in the care of another. That can still be part of "love" -- both in that you trust someone that much AND in that they are willing to care for you.

The sort of possession I describe is when someone dominates someone else who is either naive or unwilling.

Meh. Sounds boring.

SJ v/s NT ?

 

[Giggly]

SJ v/s NT ?

I dunno about that.

 

[Bella]

I have one very controling family member (mostly so with her children) and her parents were very controling. It seems like if you weren't allowed to control the day to day things that are age-apropriate as you grow up you try to make up for it in adulthood by controlling those closest to you. She also never had a career or hobbies to speak of so there were only children to fuss over. Fussing is a complete understatement here.

 

[kiddykat]

Based on personal experiences with having dealt with overbearingly controlling ppl in my life, I would say it's a cover-up for deep deep rooted-insecurities based on self-perpetuated feelings of unhappiness/unworthiness. That's just what I get from them.

I have an ESTJ uncle who won't get off his high-horse. The thought of him irks me. He gets so preachy & controlling that reminds me of a *so-called* 'fair/balanced' news analyst who I absolutely CANNOT stand. I just wonder how he ceases to live with himself day-in/day-out. So tempted to send him a variety package of Preparation-H signed by anonymous for X-mas. The man needs a chill pill..

 

[ZiL]

If I sense that someone is trying to order me around or control me, it seems like I automatically will not do, or will do whatever half-ass, even if what they want me to do is what I really want to do too.

True that. It's like, I'm glad you just ensured that whatever you wanted will certainly not happen now.

 

[colmena]

My deviance tends to go up a notch. Even if I wanted to do something, or planned to do something, if someone else tells me to do it, I'll suddenly really not want to do it.

 

[Salomé]

My deviance tends to go up a notch. Even if I wanted to do something, or planned to do something, if someone else tells me to do it, I'll suddenly really not want to do it.

isn't everyone like that? who, with half a mind, wants to be told what to do ?

this is where Js are way out of order, in my experience. they have a double standard. they don't want to be told what to do, but they won't extend the same courtesy to others.

Ps tend to treat people as they would want to be treated (aka The Golden Rule).

unless their lives are in immediate danger, there is never an altruistic reason to attempt to control another person.

arguing this with a J is an exercise in futility their thinking is too rigid to accommodate it.