[MBTI General] Men: Which types has the most physically attractive women in your experiences?

[Alassea]

Not to mention mistyping is a thing.

So all in all, I'm very skeptical something like this could be representative of anything.

This is exactly what I'm saying.
Also, the stereotype of Se = attractiveness. Like seriously? This is like grade 0 cliche stereotype right there and it's still a thing?

Even my ESFP friend mentioned it herself.

Also...Ti?? Hahahahahaha...

I feel like at this point, people are literally just pulling stuff out of their asses so that their own type gets deemed 'most attractive.' Like one user on here (Not calling any names ) thought he was an INFJ and said "Ni/Fe are best. Everyone said I shouldn't stop smiling today blah blah blah" and then turns out, found out they were probably INTJ or something and switched their answers to "Ni/Se" the second time they posted on this thread and then finally unidentified type lmao. I got receipts yo.

 

[Alassea]

It all depends on how the category is defined. When it is given traits focused primarily on the Ni definitions of Jung, then yes, it is rare, and when the category is broadened to focus on Fe with a wider ranging set of attributes for the internal workings of Ni, then it is a bigger category. These definitions are not intrinsic truth, but ways of organizing reality, so whether a category is rare or common is entirely up to the people creating the theoretical construct.

I'm not a man, but wouldn't it follow logically that the category with the largest number of attractive women would be the largest category? Statistically the largest group will likely have the largest number (not percentage) of attractive people, therefore ESFJ?

This actually makes a lot of sense and I agree with this.
Legit, so many ESFJ girls I know take care of their looks and they look great (my coworkers, friends, aunts, Margot Robbie, GAL GADOT)

And...They don't use Se/Ni! Who would have known?

 

[chubber]

It all depends on how the category is defined. When it is given traits focused primarily on the Ni definitions of Jung, then yes, it is rare, and when the category is broadened to focus on Fe with a wider ranging set of attributes for the internal workings of Ni, then it is a bigger category. These definitions are not intrinsic truth, but ways of organizing reality, so whether a category is rare or common is entirely up to the people creating the theoretical construct.

This is what changed between Jung and Meyers,

Jung said, INFJ and INFP appears the same, MBTI says INFJ and ENFP will appear the same... see what I mean?

I'm not a man, but wouldn't it follow logically that the category with the largest number of attractive women would be the largest category? Statistically the largest group will likely have the largest number (not percentage) of attractive people, therefore ESFJ?

Only if you believe in MBTI statistics.