Prejudice against Sensors?

[pure_mercury]

How is that a double standard? S's are perfectly free to make complaint here about the N's whom they feel don't make enough effort to communicate clearly. In fact they'd be lauded as being open-minded and free of the nasty N bias. You could create special threads in your private forums to complain about it without comments from the N.

Special threads to complain about Ns are lame. Just like special threads to complain about Ss are lame. That's my point: don't be lame. Don't take something hurtful IRL and then turn around to do it online. You know, I enjoy a good complaint session as much as or more than the next guy, but this is ridiculous. If you SERIOUSLY are so weak-willed that "Ss," or "Ns," or "Ts," or "ABCDEFuckingGs" are making your life intolerable, no amount of online venting or MBTI study will change that. Moreover, your right to express yourself doesn't mean you have a right to be free from criticism. If you say something that offends people on here, they have every right to come down on you for it.

But let's just forget all of that!

Okay, you've convinced me, the sensors need and deserve special protection on a board full of brutal truth towards every other function type--- single out the sensors and make it politically incorrect for them to be criticized, even though they are still allowed to criticize N's on here with the very same criticisms that the evil N were daring to complain about them using in the first place. Will that help soothe everyone's ruffled feathers? Sounds like a win-win to me.

I am not talking about special treatment. I am talking about not being a hypocrite. There is so much hot air here, I feel like taking a shower just so I can have hair blown dry without running up the electric bill.

 

[ColonelGadaafi]

Anyhow this hole buisness is truly moronic. No reasonable person would use Terms such as SENSOR/INUTIVE as a criteria to harshly judge a person's character, in IRL or the NET. The MBTI typing is typology more then anything, a roughly drawn approxomite sketch of archetypical personalities, a classfication system, vague schematics of the expected personality traits potenially possible to develop.

To all the inutives who claim to have been put in marginalized positions because of unconcious sensors, who find your diffrence and unearthy thinking to be a justification to discriminate, they are IQNORANT to not appreciate novelity and variety. However that does not justify your blatant generalizations nor your predjudice.

 

[Ivy]

When you complain about how sensors treat you in real life, you're assuming the people who are mistreating you are sensors because of the manner in which they mistreated you. To me this is a recursive loop that leads to a lot of circular self-proving. I'm not saying you can't do it (I don't think we've ever infracted anybody for it, or BlueWing would have been banned long ago) just.. I think it's misguided, personally, admin hat off.

The sensor protection thing IMO comes from the atmosphere in the beginning of the forum when most people were INTPC transplants. At the time my blog was the only one in the section which was SJ and SP combined at that time, and even then I was pretty sure I wasn't an actual SJ, I was just representing the most underrepresented type here.

 

[laintpe]

There are a few members on here who I actually listen to... one of them is an S, and certainly is not lacking in intelligence.

This thread is going in circles.

 

[prplchknz]

There are a few members on here who I actually listen to... one of them is an S, and certainly is not lacking in intelligence.

This thread is going in circles.

weee *makes airplane noises*

sorry but it's true it is, and I doubt its going to reach a satisfactory conclusion everyone, so we're just going to have to accept that. The truth is how you feel about others really doesn't effect me.

 

[simulatedworld]

When you complain about how sensors treat you in real life, you're assuming the people who are mistreating you are sensors because of the manner in which they mistreated you. To me this is a recursive loop that leads to a lot of circular self-proving. I'm not saying you can't do it (I don't think we've ever infracted anybody for it, or BlueWing would have been banned long ago) just.. I think it's misguided, personally, admin hat off.

The sensor protection thing IMO comes from the atmosphere in the beginning of the forum when most people were INTPC transplants. At the time my blog was the only one in the section which was SJ and SP combined at that time, and even then I was pretty sure I wasn't an actual SJ, I was just representing the most underrepresented type here.

No, we're assuming they're Sensors based on the personal knowledge we have about their data-gathering and decision-making processes. Our logic doesn't just go, "He's treating me poorly therefore he's an S!" That's silly. If that were the case, we would never perceive being treated poorly by any Ns, which is obviously not true (I could name lots of counterexamples of nice Ss and mean Ns from my personal life, but I'll spare you the details.)

The anti-S bias in this forum comes from exactly where we say it comes from--most people in real life, regardless of type, are prone to ostracizing those who are different; this is just a function of being human. And since more people are S than N, Ns get the short end of the stick on this particular dichotomy. The same thing happens to T women and F men, or to Ps in the military, or to Ss on an N-dominated forum, and so on--whoever is in the minority in any given situation. Heart is saying that this minority-hating is not a unique phenomenon here, and yet it gets special treatment moreso than "protecting" other types.

For that matter, why do we need to protect any types or preferences from being criticized? I can say something negative that I've observed about, say, ENTPs in general, without directing any hatred toward specific ENTP individuals here. You guys need to stop being so sensitive about anything directed at your group; it's obvious that such broad-sweeping statements can't possibly apply to every member of the group. So suck it up and realize that many people of your type may actually be guilty of whatever it is they're being accused of, and that this accusation doesn't have to apply to you personally.

And Merc--I get where you're coming from about discrimination being bad, and I agree. We wouldn't want to make negative judgments about a specific person based on type, but that's not what most of the "I'm annoyed with x type" threads are doing. I find these threads useful because they offer me perspective from other types on what sorts of things my type does unconsciously that may annoy them, and I'm able to use these as constructive criticism without taking them too personally. You could try interpreting them that way instead of as personal attacks.

Just because we perceive being mistreated often by S-type people doesn't mean we're incapable of determining what an S-type person is like. Your (Ivy) assumptions about the logical processes that go into this determination are way, way off.

 

[pure_mercury]

No, we're assuming they're Sensors based on the personal knowledge we have about their data-gathering and decision-making processes. Our logic doesn't just go, "He's treating me poorly therefore he's an S!" That's silly. If that were the case, we would never perceive being treated poorly by any Ns, which is obviously not true (I could name lots of counterexamples of nice Ss and mean Ns from my personal life, but I'll spare you the details.)

The anti-S bias in this forum comes from exactly where we say it comes from--most people in real life, regardless of type, are prone to ostracizing those who are different; this is just a function of being human. And since more people are S than N, Ns get the short end of the stick on this particular dichotomy. The same thing happens to T women and F men, or to Ps in the military, or to Ss on an N-dominated forum, and so on--whoever is in the minority in any given situation. Heart is saying that this minority-hating is not a unique phenomenon here, and yet it gets special treatment moreso than "protecting" other types.

For that matter, why do we need protect any types or preferences from being criticized? I can say something negative that I've observed about, say, ENTPs in general, without directing any hatred toward specific ENTP individuals here. You guys need to stop being so sensitive about anything directed at your group; it's obvious that such broad-sweeping statements can't possibly apply to every member of the group. So suck it up and realize that many people of your type may actually be guilty of whatever it is they're being accused of, and that this accusation doesn't have to apply to you personally.

And Merc--I get where you're coming from about discrimination being bad, and I agree. We wouldn't want to make negative judgments about a specific person based on type, but that's not what most of the "I'm annoyed with x type" threads are doing. I find these threads useful because they offer me perspective from other types on what sorts of things my type does that annoy them, and I'm able to use these as constructive criticism without taking them too personally. You could try interpreting them that way instead of as personal attacks.

Just because we perceive being mistreated often by S-type people doesn't mean we're incapable of determining what an S-type person is like. Your assumptions about the logical processes that go into this determination are way, way off.

You must realize that what you are suggesting here actually is protecting Ns from criticism for criticizing Ss. It all comes back on itself. If you really are talking about letting people criticize others, you cannot come back and say that people disagreeing is "protecting certain type from criticism." See what I mean?

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

When you complain about how sensors treat you in real life, you're assuming the people who are mistreating you are sensors because of the manner in which they mistreated you. To me this is a recursive loop that leads to a lot of circular self-proving. I'm not saying you can't do it (I don't think we've ever infracted anybody for it, or BlueWing would have been banned long ago) just.. I think it's misguided, personally, admin hat off.

The sensor protection thing IMO comes from the atmosphere in the beginning of the forum when most people were INTPC transplants. At the time my blog was the only one in the section which was SJ and SP combined at that time, and even then I was pretty sure I wasn't an actual SJ, I was just representing the most underrepresented type here.

Out of curiosity, what are the statistics here in terms of numbers of S, N, E, I, T, F, P, and J? I'm not sure if it is easy to look up or not. Early on in the forum when there were so few Sensors around, and plenty of negative comments about Sensors, I remember the few that showed up would get chased off. Because of that i started a few threads in support of Sensors, because it seemed to be in the spirit of this forum to be inclusive of all types. It was a place where you can get the diversity of various viewpoints. I agree that special protection of some particular type could be undesirable, but my understanding of the P, J, F, T, E, and I bashing is that each category is well represented so there is that sense of plenty of people on both sides of the debate. This was not originally the case for Sensors, but I'm not sure if it has changed significantly. It also seemed like a natural attempt to recreate the polarization that necessitated the creation of this forum in the first place. At any rate, if someone is free to make criticisms, the next person is free to criticize the criticism, and the next one to criticize the criticism of the criticism, and then start all over. It does make sense to distinguish between the forum policies - the actions that admins/mods make verses the overall opinions people care to express. As long as people aren't getting banned for disliking Sensors, it seems fair enough to test the ideas against the opinions of others whatever those may be.

 

[Ivy]

Just because we perceive being mistreated often by S-type people doesn't mean we're incapable of determining what an S-type person is like. Your (Ivy) assumptions about the logical processes that go into this determination are way, way off.

With all due respect, you've been here a couple of months, and I've been here since the site was started, as a spinoff of INTP Central where there was a lot of anti-S and anti-F sentiment. Since then I've seen it many, many times here--a person forms an idea about what an S is like, and finds it consistently proven by data of their own choosing. It's called confirmation bias. It's a bit more complicated than "this person is mistreating me, therefore they are S." It's more along the lines of "I don't get along with or like this person, and because of that I notice that they seem to me to be narrow-minded and short-sighted, so they are probably S. In turn, Ss are narrow-minded and short-sighted." And so on, in loops. The flipside of it happens here and at INTPC all the time: "You're so cool, are you sure you're an S?"

 

[Ivy]

Toonia, I'll ask the tech guys if there's an easy way to spit out some numbers like that. I seem to recall file cabinet did that once, so maybe he or spirilis can do it again.

 

[heart]

If you say something that offends people on here, they have every right to come down on you for it.

Nothing wrong with having a statement countered on a case by case basis, that's not what this is about. This about people trying to say that a whole class of cognitive functions cannot be complained about or spoken of in a negative light. As if just the face of doing so were wrong on the face of it, not the individual comments. It's about a type of political correctness, which okay if were going to be doing that here let's at least be honest about it.

You must realize that what you are suggesting here actually is protecting Ns from criticism for criticizing Ss.

No I am not, it is a fine point here. It's perfectly fine to counter criticisms from Ns on S's when they occur and based on the facts of each case--- what is disturbing are these pushes to make it seem like criticizing S's in general is somehow wrong in some blanket, accross the board fashion.

Special threads to complain about Ns are lame. Just like special threads to complain about Ss are lame.

That's a fair criticism when directed at individual threads based on their content.

That's my point: don't be lame. Don't take something hurtful IRL and then turn around to do it online.

Yet the overall board culture isn't like this. Thinkers insult Feelers all the time and vice-versa.

You know, I enjoy a good complaint session as much as or more than the next guy, but this is ridiculous. If you SERIOUSLY are so weak-willed that "Ss," or "Ns," or "Ts," or "ABCDEFuckingGs" are making your life intolerable, no amount of online venting or MBTI study will change that.

Same thing can be said of many things, just like politics. Doesn't mean people stop complaining.

Moreover, your right to express yourself doesn't mean you have a right to be free from criticism. If you say something that offends people on here, they have every right to come down on you for it.

They have a right to come down on me for the content of what I have said in each post, but attempts to stop me from speaking negatively on a specific topic is veering into political correctness and censorship.

 

[pure_mercury]

Nothing wrong with having a statement countered on a case by case basis, that's not what this is about. This about people trying to say that a whole class of cognitive functions cannot be complained about or spoken of in a negative light. As if just the face of doing so were wrong on the face of it, not the individual comments. It's about a type of political correctness, which okay if were going to be doing that here let's at least be honest about it.

OK, so let's turn this around: why is it then wrong for Ss to criticize/put down Ns IRL? Or is it not wrong?

No I am not, it is a fine point here. It's perfectly fine to counter criticisms from Ns on S's when they occur and based on the facts of each case--- what is disturbing are these pushes to make it seem like criticizing S's in general is somehow wrong in some blanket, accross the board fashion.

If you extend that same attitude to EVERYONE (including MBTI-ignorant Ss IRL), then it shouldn't be a problem.

 

[pure_mercury]

They have a right to come down on me for the content of what I have said in each post, but attempts to stop me from speaking negatively on a specific topic is veering into political correctness and censorship.

100% WRONG. Combating speech with opposing speech is not censorship. No way, no how.

 

[Quinlan]

I'm completely lost as to where we're at (criticising the criticism of prior critcism?).

... but why generalise Sensing at all? Some SJs and STPs seem more alien to me than some Ns. If you feel a need to make sweeping criticisms of big parts of the population I feel sorry for you.

 

[heart]

OK, so let's turn this around: why is it then wrong for Ss to criticize/put down Ns IRL? Or is it not wrong?

No one is stopping them from doing it and it's just a fact of life that they do it and will continue doing it. I haven't attempted any campaign to silence them.

But what you want for some odd reason is to say that N cannot complain about S complaining about them. You want to make it a rule of political correctness on this board. That's what I take issue with.

I don't care if you come along and refute and each and every comment made about S on here on its individual merits, that's not what I am talking about. What rubs me the wrong way is people trying to act as if just the act of criticizing an S is wrong in and of itself regardless of whether or not it has any basis in truth, that it's just wrong because it's wrong.

 

[heart]

100% WRONG. Combating speech with opposing speech is not censorship. No way, no how.

It's okay to combat speech. It's not okay to try and gag people on a specific topic.

You are missing the point, so I'll give up now, it's futile to continue.

 

[pure_mercury]

It's okay to combat speech. It's not okay to try and gag people on a specific topic.

You are missing the point, so I'll give up now, it's futile to continue.

Have you been threatened with expulsion from the site or had threads taken down? Has the federal government put you on a list somewhere?

 

[heart]

Have you been threatened with expulsion from the site or had threads taken down? Has the federal government put you on a list somewhere?

Futile to continue. We're talking past each other.

 

[pure_mercury]

No one is stopping them from doing it and it's just a fact of life that they do it and will continue doing it. I haven't attempted any campaign to silence them.

Disagreeing with you or even telling you that you shouldn't feel the way you do is not "silencing" you. Sorry, it's just not.

But what you want for some odd reason is to say that N cannot complain about S complaining about them. You want to make it a rule of political correctness on this board. That's what I take issue with.

I am not talking about rules. I am talking about what's fair. Show me where I've suggested making a rule against Ns complaining on this board, and I will give you $1,000.

I don't care if you come along and refute and each and every comment made about S on here on its individual merits, that's not what I am talking about. What rubs me the wrong way is people trying to act as if just the act of criticizing an S is wrong in and of itself regardless of whether or not it has any basis in truth, that it's just wrong because it's wrong.

They have every right to believe it, whether it rubs you the wrong way or not. You have to deal with it. That is not censorship or political correctness. You have a right to express your opinions. You do NOT have a right to have them respected.

 

[Halla74]

I'm completely lost as to where we're at (criticising the criticism of prior critcism?).

... but why generalise Sensing at all? Some SJs and STPs seem more alien to me than some Ns. If you feel a need to make sweeping criticisms of big parts of the population I feel sorry for you.

Well put, Brother! Cheers to your fairness and virtue.