Are you wary of Fe?

[Kalach]

Can you please name some group norms and values that are so oppressive that you feel you need to broadly categorize them under the iron fist of Fe?

Logically? Any and all of them. Fi judges from the inside, so logically anything at all that owes its imperative to the outside is oppressive.

"We are all...", "Everyone says...", "You should..."

Naturally, any and all Fi users will also use these formulations. Like, for example, LadyJaye currently telling people to back off Fe.

And I guess she knows, not a single Fi user is going to, at heart, take only her word for it that we should. At heart, we will only follow her word if we decide, for whatever mixed up, jumbled, personal reason, that we as us by ourselves should. (People with stronger, larger, more toward the dominant Fi may--appear to--cave more easily, but I never will. Fe stole my sex life and my dignity. Well, technically, it wasn't Fe, it was an Fe dom running on Se, and I cooperated. Or did I? Did I really?)

Yep, I fear and distrust, perhaps even detest, the influence of Fe in my life.

And if no one wishes to respect that, I'll go ahead and assume I'm allowed to fuck people over with Te too.

(Actually, the second time Fe was going to steal my sex life and dignity, that's exactly what I did. Harsh, cruel, cold, dismissive, disinterested in the person lecturing. Plus a little Fi hysteria. And a fast exit once I'd won. I got my eye on all a ya now.)





And if anyone's fool enough to think my fear and distrust comes from subjective, partial, unhealthy personal experience, hooray for not knowing much about the MBTI model.

 

[proteanmix]

Not so much the values as it is maybe the execution/social norms set by them?

For me, for instance the whole 'you cannot visit someone without bringing like a plant or something thing', or the 'you must send a birthday card to show you care', 'you cannot decline an invitation to visit their new home twice in a row'. Social obligations, basically. Things that are supposed to come from those values, from your heart and are one valid expression of those values, but somehow lose their value because they are enforced that way by society. If you don't follow the prescribed method of society, you often are considered 'rude' or 'inconsiderate'. That's a shame, I feel

OK, so is this a case of killing the messenger?

Take for example the maxim of Love Your Neighbor or Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Let's say these stem from a Fi universal value. Fe seizes upon this value and Fe being an extroverted judging function seeks a way to execute this. Do people find the way these maxims are expressed to be oppressive? Does anyone have an alternative way to express these values? Give me some alternatives!

How do you express some universal value in shorthand or is it supposed to be held up in the chambers of your heart, never seeing the light of day? If I believe to love my neighbor (which I use as a euphemism for the Human Family) can't I express that love through say charity or some other type of philanthropy? Can't I manifest that love through recognizing the birth of a person or their death or some other life event or rite of passage? Can't I express that feeling through physical affection or a compliment, or some other action that makes that sentiment tangible?

Even if I use Fi as the universal value creator what expression does that value have unless through some language of expression? It's a dead language, it doesn't evolve or thrive it just sits like a lump doing nothing, but perhaps that is what people want it to do? Just be with no expression?

In order to deconstruct a concept or talk about pretty much anything, you've got to get a good, solid, working definition of it.

I got the term "group norms and values" straight out of this Functions of Type book that's sitting right in front of me. To that end, it lists "Judge behaviors according to group values" and "Objectively educate other people about appropriate people" as Extraverted Feeling skills. The "subskills" that fall underneath them just seem irrelevant, unnecessary, and slightly disconcerting to me, so that colored the answer that I just gave.

So, if you want to rally against some crazy non-conformist rebels-without-a-clue, I guess you can start with Jungian authors.

I totally agree with getting a working definition. And we probably don't have the same working definition. My definition is more social psychological in nature and not based on the typological definition. So when I think of group norms and values I think of things like social entropy, or prisoner's dilemma games, social mores, cultural values, things of that nature. I think on what exactly they are, not what a phrase that refers to them is. And I try to break down exactly what those things are which I've not seen anyone do, just generally rail against the fact they exist. That's not enough for me.

So I'm asking you to please, break them down. What are some that you specifically find oppressive (Amargith gave some and thank you for that) and how do you connect those with the Fe function?

 

[Amargith]

OK, so is this a case of killing the messenger?

Take for example the maxim of Love Your Neighbor or Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Let's say these stem from a Fi universal value. Fe seizes upon this value and Fe being an extroverted judging function seeks a way to execute this. Do people find the way these maxims are expressed to be oppressive? Does anyone have an alternative way to express these values? Give me some alternatives!

How do you express some universal value in shorthand or is it supposed to be held up in the chambers of your heart, never seeing the light of day? If I believe to love my neighbor (which I use as a euphemism for the Human Family) can't I express that love through say charity or some other type of philanthropy? Can't I manifest that love through recognizing the birth of a person or their death or some other life event or rite of passage? Can't I express that feeling through physical affection or a compliment, or some other action that makes that sentiment tangible?

Even if I use Fi as the universal value creator what expression does that value have unless through some language of expression? It's a dead language, it doesn't evolve or thrive it just sits like a lump doing nothing, but perhaps that is what people want it to do? Just be with no expression?

No, Fe's way of expressing is perfect. It's the expectation to have the same thing done onto the Fe-user that is the problem as others may express their joy, gratitude, etc in different ways. I for instance, tend to express my gratitude by going out of my way to do them a favor tailored specifically to them as a person. That's my Fi. And although those gestures are appreciated, they're often not recognized as the 'proper' thing to do in situation A. I do express those things, but not in the same way that Fe-users do. I do it in a way that feels genuine and authentic to me, personal and special between the person it's meant for and myself.

I wouldn't want Fe-users to act like Fi-users on this. All I would like is that you recognize our way of expressing for what it is

 

[Kalach]

I think perhaps the thing about Fe is the user has a basic assumption that everyone cooperates with others on feeling. So if things went wrong, it was your fault because you didn't cooperate, you failed in your obligation to others.

Fi has something very similar, but perhaps in principle different. Namely, if things went wrong, it was because some third thing failed, the action. The feelings were incompatible and the action failed.

Perhaps. Not sure if that is coherent.

 

[Thalassa]

I think Fe rocks in gym socks. People who are squeamish of things that are dissimilar to themselves are just complaining about their own intimidation. Give me a break.

Give me a break - that's exactly what I say to being around too much Fe, especially unhealthy Fe.

The reason why it annoys me so much isn't because it's "different" (I actually have some decently developed Fe in my cognitive function orders) it annoys me because when it's unhealthy it's fucking invasive and blah blah blah and energy suck from other people because "I just need to feel needed."

Codependency. It's a word.

You can't blame a psychology function for your problems with individuals. Learn to tell the difference between the two, people. Quit dumping on Fe.

This is true. But sometimes people just need a space to vent about what bothers them.

 

[proteanmix]

No, Fe's way of expressing is perfect. It's the expectation to have the same thing done onto the Fe-user that is the problem as others may express their joy, gratitude, etc in different ways. I for instance, tend to express my gratitude by going out of my way to do them a favor tailored specifically to them as a person. That's my Fi. And although those gestures are appreciated, they're often not recognized as the 'proper' thing to do in situation A. I do express those things, but not in the same way that Fe-users do. I do it in a way that feels genuine and authentic to me, personal and special between the person it's meant for and myself.

I wouldn't want Fe-users to act like Fi-users on this. All I would like is that you recognize our way of expressing for what it is

LOL, if any of those other ways ever became codified it would become the New Fe and then everyone would be hating on it. I understand that some feelings are ineffable and difficult to express outwardly even though it's felt inside, they're difficult to approximate outwardly. But that's also why I think that often times Fe serves as a representation of these ineffable things. Like I hate roses (but don't hate them enough not to like getting them!) but I understand that when I've been given a rose or a bouquet of flowers, what they symbolize. I understand the sentiment behind them. Alternatively (and I know I'm being extreme) if someone gave me a vial of their blood to symbolize the same thing, I'm not quite sure how I would respond to that I'm pretty sure it would freak me out, but if I figured out that's how they express their feelings maybe I'd come around eventually.

 

[Kalach]

Alternatively (and I know I'm being extreme) if someone gave me a vial of their blood to symbolize the same thing, I'm not quite sure how I would respond to that I'm pretty sure it would freak me out, but if I figured out that's how they express their feelings maybe I'd come around eventually.

You wouldn't regard it ultimately as strange and unhealthy? Because while the action has the form of giving and loving and sharing, the motive behind the action has to be seen as mixed, yeah? Which reaction has the priority: "Wow, thanks--I think?!--that's kinda strange but I can see you're trying" or "Wow, that's fucked up, what were you thinking?!" An unhealthy expression of something good between two people, or the naturally weird result of something misguided inside the person?

In this instance perhaps Fe and Fi users would come to effectively the same conclusion.

 

[proteanmix]

You wouldn't regard it ultimately as strange and unhealthy? Because while the action has the form of giving and loving and sharing, the motive behind the action has to be seen as mixed, yeah? Which reaction has the priority: "Wow, thanks--I think?!--that's kinda strange but I can see you're trying" or "Wow, that's fucked up, what were you thinking?!" An unhealthy expression of something good between two people, or the naturally weird result of something misguided inside the person?

In this instance perhaps Fe and Fi users would come to effectively the same conclusion.

I really didn't like to get that extreme but that's the route I feel like I have to go in these types of discussions. I keep pressing for people to be more specific so I can get an understanding of how exactly is Fe doing this that or the other to you and no one can give me an answer.

I watched this short film a while ago about two different men pursuing two different women but doing the exact same things to woo them. The film deliberately wanted to make a statement about how people perceive things by making the men essentially stalkers; standing outside of the women's window, following them, going through garbage to find out their favorite foods and such. One woman had the man pursuing her put in jail for stalking and the other woman married the man pursuing her.

The way I feel about this constant demeaning of Fe is the way the first woman had the man arrested for his courting of her. I feel that if the woman wanted a more "normal" mode of being courted she somehow didn't get the true feelings of the man pursuing her. The woman who married the man who did the same thing got it. But what the hell was there to get? If the woman didn't like the way she was being pursued or it didn't appeal to her is that not her prerogative? The way I understand people I understand the way people talk about Fi on the forum is that anything and everything goes. There are no "acceptable" modes of behavior, if someone wants to give you dead rats as a Valentine's Day present (if one is given at all...yeah I'm being extreme again ) then it should be accepted as such. I see no give at all. And it's curious to me because that's the same way people perceive Fe, as being rigid and unbending when nearly every FJ that comments on threads like this say NO NO NO it's not like that. It's like people continue to believe what they want regardless of what the people who use that function say it is. It's frustrating because no one really wants to understand anything they just want to vent.

So to answer your question, yeah Option A then Option B depending on if I thought the person was mostly harmless or not. I'm not going to try and prove how alternative and non-traditional I am by saying my heart would melt. It's so funny because as a Fe-dom, I don't require these huge displays of how special I am to the person but I would like some expression in a language I can understand. Instead of taking a tourniquet to your body (figuratively) to uniquely show how much you care for me, the bouquet of flowers would do quite nicely. Keep it simple.

 

[Kalach]

 

[proteanmix]

Thank you very much.

 

[Kalach]

It seems like it is definitional: Fe users have a basic assumption that people directly cooperate on feeling right. Even INTP's show this. (If you look hard.) Fi users assume people indirectly cooperate on feeling questions.

What's the difference?

I don't know. It seems to be quite hard to express without just saying the feeling focus is different.

Both sides can approximate the other side's practice, but it isn't their preference. And if it's not their preferences, maybe especially Fi users will "feel wrong" and react.

How would an Fi user encourage an Fe user to approximate Fi practice? By making them fail, I guess, making them feel bad about themselves.

That actually seems to be what Fe and Fi users encourage each other to do: to fail. To not perform according to the standard set out by the other side.



And quite possibly T types are loudest in complaint because their F side is (at least theoretically) much more reactive than active.

 

[Tallulah]

Well, my fi isn't dominant nor secundary. I only seem to use it when I'm going through tough times. To get things in perspective in order to move on.

Since it is very irrational to be whiny and annoying.

Like Tifi. Has a ring to it.

But I can relate to Fi being a bit odd when very dominant in a person. They can get really irrational opinions and like totally back it up. Which can be very 'wtf'. (Not in all people.)

Yes. This.

Heavy Fi users can come across very selfishly at times. They've reached their conclusion based on an internal values system, and don't really care how that conclusion will affect others. They feel like in order to be "true to themselves," they have no choice but insist upon x, and if you don't respect their wishes without question, you're some sort of oppressor.

 

[hokie912]

I don't think my Fe function is as focused on "group norms" as would be indicated here. I take them into account, certainly, but it's more that there are some things I'm compelled to do to show individual people that I care about them (assuming that I do) and am mindful of their values, etc. I don't think that everyone needs to have that same perspective, although I'll admit that every once in a while it's confusing to me when someone doesn't. I don't see myself as an enforcer of norms; on the contrary, I think morality has a situational component that Fi occasionally neglects to take into account.

I can completely see why Fe, when used aggressively, makes people uncomfortable, though. It definitely can be manipulative and conforming.

 

[Virtual ghost]

I am not wary of it. But people with strong Fe are wary of me.

Which is because my Fe technically does not exist (plus my Fi is not anything special)
What means that my natural reaction to Fe is Te. So it is inevitable that a Fe user will be annoyed with me since I am taking their statements apart by default and I am not impressed by their social status.

From experiance I know that ExFJ women are trying to keep their distance from me for the most part.. Which was quite obvious when I was still as school. But they did some probing since I looked quite lifeless to them.

 

[Lauren Ashley]

I don't think my Fe function is as focused on "group norms" as would be indicated here. I take them into account, certainly, but it's more that there are some things I'm compelled to do to show individual people that I care about them (assuming that I do) and am mindful of their values, etc. I don't think that everyone needs to have that same perspective, although I'll admit that every once in a while it's confusing to me when someone doesn't. I don't see myself as an enforcer of norms; on the contrary, I think morality has a situational component that Fi occasionally neglects to take into account.

I can completely see why Fe, when used aggressively, makes people uncomfortable, though. It definitely can be manipulative and conforming.

I'm the same way. There are probably myriad ways that I express Fe that I don't even notice, but the main way I do express it is in being respectful of other people; paying attention to what their particular needs and wants are and adapting to that. But I wonder if that is Ni-Fe rather than simply Fe.

 

[Cimarron]

I think of Fe as symbolized by a hug.

 

[Lauren Ashley]

I think of Fe as symbolized by a hug.

...that too. I love hugs

Just remembered another way I express Fe: sharing ideas and perceptions with others. I like the back-and-forth of a good discussion.

 

[Amargith]

Yes. This.

Heavy Fi users can come across very selfishly at times. They've reached their conclusion based on an internal values system, and don't really care how that conclusion will affect others. They feel like in order to be "true to themselves," they have no choice but insist upon x, and if you don't respect their wishes without question, you're some sort of oppressor.

This should normally be tempered by a value that almost all Fi-users share: since I want my personal space to do what I want, I will respect others space for this as well. It only becomes a problem when those spaces really clash and at that point, I myself would look for a solution that makes both parties comfortable. But I am indeed unlikely to completely step away from it and logic is the last thing that will convince me, only necessity will allow me to shift it aside temporarily and partially as an act of leniency to for instance not stand in the way of something that needs to get done, or a group's decision.

In a debate for instance, I see no point. I respect your pov and you will do the same for me, or the exchange of ideas will stop. It's sad that I in no way can show you why this is true for me (as Fi is sometimes really hard to explain though logical to us), but bulldozering me with your logic isn't going to help. The only time your logic is likely to influence me is if you come up with really good F-appealing arguments which show me a discrepancy in my core values, or I have yet to make up my mind on the subject at hand.

...that too. I love hugs

Just remembered another way I express Fe: sharing ideas and perceptions with others. I like the back-and-forth of a good discussion.

Fi-users like that too, as it allows us to enrich our view on the world and fit it those parts of the discussion that were useful into our core values.

 

[Lauren Ashley]

Fi-users like that too, as it allows us to enrich our view on the world and fit it those parts of the discussion that were useful into our core values.

Maybe in your case this has more to do with Ne? Ne is the extraverted function, not Fi. But regardless, this is why I don't understand why everyone is making it seem as if Fi and Fe are completely different. I get along smashingly with many xNFPs and there is little to no Fi-Fe clashing that I'm aware of. Our values could be aligned in the same way that another Fe dom/aux's values and mine could be different.

 

[Amargith]

Maybe in your case this has more to do with Ne? Ne is the extraverted function, not Fi. But regardless, this is why I don't understand why everyone is making it seem as if Fi and Fe are completely different. I get along smashingly with many xNFPs and there is little to no Fi-Fe clashing that I'm aware of. Our values could be aligned in the same way that another Fe dom/aux's values and mine could be different.

Oh you might be right, Ne might be the tool we use to collect the data, but Fi is its enddestination, usually