I have to say I do. It isn't so apparent in written communication (on this forum I sometimes don't recognize if I read a guy or girl's post), so I develop an idealized version of the guys of the type, but when I meet them IRL I cannot relate half as much as I hoped (and I can relate very well to NT girls). The same with NF guys - my dad and my brother are INFPs, and even though we're generally very similar people and I can relate, there are still fundamental differences in communication style.
Maybe you are confused what MBTI Thinking/Feeling really is. It isn't the same as thinking and feeling in the general sense. Maybe you're right though, I probably associate thinking and feeling with objective vs. subjective. I don't know if MBTI deals very well with this difference, though; I've read more opinions as to which functions are supposed to be subjective and which objective, and I wasn't sure if I agreed.Originally Posted by sleepy
As for objective/subjective, I again have to say that I find Thinking girls more subjective than Thinking guys, and Feeling guys more objective than Feeling girls.
However, basically I'd say that the core of this discussion lies in the question, "what constitutes a male/female". I'm pretty sure it isn't just body peculiarities, and I also very much doubt it's only T/F or whatever. As Jennifer pointed out, there were cases of transsexuals who were raised as one gender but never felt "at home" in their body and later changed their gender, and it was hardly because they were raised to be Fs but felt like Ts. Therefore, I'd say that nature and nurture both play a significant role, and I really don't think that males and females are the same.
That might be true , but lots of people indulge in generalities and they are hardly only INFPs. Also, sometimes it's important to create generalities (= theories) and change them according to new input, just like it's sometimes important to look at things individually. Besides, MBTI is one huge generality anyway.Originally Posted by sleepy