User Tag List

Page 116 of 170 FirstFirst ... 1666106114115116117118126166 ... LastLast
Results 1,151 to 1,160 of 1696

Thread: When an INFJ doorslams you / cuts you out of their life / breaks off contact

  1. #1151
    Senior Member Array yeghor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,433

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mane View Post
    no, nobody is telling anyone not run away in a state of physical abuse, nobody is telling anyone to never end a relationship or break up with anyone, nobody is telling anyone to never take some time off for themselves, nobody is telling anyone to never physically slam doors, nobody is telling you to not listen to Back Door Slam.
    What about verbal and emotional abuse?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mane View Post
    the act of cutting off ties in reactions to perspectives of yourself which conflict with your ego.
    So there are 2 parties...A and B...

    ManeDoorslam = B wants to end the relationship with A based on own deductions but A tells B that B's deductions are incorrect/mistaken so B shouldn't...B insists on own deductions and ends the relationship anyway and refuses A's prospective attempts to initiate contact...A believes that B could not accept A's deductions about B because they conflicted with B's self image/own deductions/perceptions...

    So please in as brief and simple terms as possible:

    a) Are A's deductions correct?

    b) Are B's deductions correct?

    c) Could the reverse be true? That A could not handle B's deductions because they conflicted with A's self image/own deductions/perception?

    d) How to identify the true circumstances of the relationship independent of A and B?

    e) How should A and B decide individually whether to maintain or end the relationship?

  2. #1152
    Away with the fairies Array Southern Kross's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 so/sp
    Posts
    2,912

    Default

    I've been reading along and I hope people don't mind me jumping in...

    Quote Originally Posted by fidelia View Post
    Well, I think for many INFJs, the doorslam ends up happening once the INFJ has given up on the relationship improving. It could be that they've concluded it takes more energy than the results it yields, it may be that they've lost faith in the other person's good intentions, could be that their visions are so different that they don't believe that aligning them is possible, could be that suddenly past patterns come into focus as having meaning that they had not previously recognized, they might feel they are not going in the same direction as life, or they just are hearing so much emotional noise that they need distance, they may feel like their voice is not being heard, no matter how they try to communicate. They also may feel publicly embarrassed or betrayed by someone they had trusted with the inmost parts of their being. Or they just use doorslamming to avoid uncomfortable feelings or because they are not willing to put in the work of communicating.
    Yes I think this is right, from my perspective.

    Quote Originally Posted by fidelia View Post
    I'm not really trying to define it from someone else's POV because mine is the only head I live in. I have access to some of the possible (perceived) motivations that I (or someone like me) might consider doing so and the reason I would offer those is in an attempt for the other parties that have come here to make sense of their situation. I can't right the wrongs that have happened between them and their significant other. Neither am I in the habit of doorslamming.
    OK, I'm help PB out here and try to distil this whole balagan down (@mane will understand what I mean by that ).

    So I think what element the INFJs may feel is missing from the "doorslam" definition is the way it reverberates (for the lack of a better term). I think when the definition is offered, all the INFJs can imagine is the hypothetical INFJ mindset behind it, which (naturally, like any type would) directs them see it only in a way that justifies those actions. In other words, you're only seeing why the INFJ would do it, not seeing it in terms of the back and forth of the Fe interpersonal system. Therefore it's difficult to imagine how it could be inappropriate reaction to a situation - am I correct?

    Assuming I am, here's the way I see it...

    I define the doorslam as a total mental/emotional/physical shutdown from another person. It happens when the INFJ feels they have repeatedly tried to remedy or alleviate a point of, or series of, conflict with another person. Eventually the INFJ feels that their emotional investment in this person is not of sufficient value, that their relationship is no longer worth preserving, and that the only way forward is to cut their losses, breaking all contact. Once this point is reached, it is next to impossible for the other person to re-establish contact and overcome the divide, because the INFJ's heart and mind is no longer open to engaging that person.

    OK, so that's just a definition of the surface elements; the analysis (well the NP analysis, anyway) of the 'meta-intentions' are slightly different.* The underlying reasons for it are, as has been mentioned, are perhaps more to do with self-preservation and reclaiming a sense of self. The INFJ might think of it as lifting a dark cloud that has been bearing down on them, but perhaps it is really an attempt to shut out undesirable reflections on them. I mean this in that, Fe uses other people as a kind of mirror to their own thoughts/feelings/beliefs etc. They send out ideas/information and they like to have to bounced back to them, in a slightly filtered form. That way the INFJ can see where that other stands (emotionally, mentally), verifies where they stand themselves, and details where they stand in relationship to one another. (Am I correct in saying this?) But when that other person constantly reflects back an ugly image (through conflict and/or failed interaction), they begin to impose a negative identity on the INFJ. When the input doesn't achieve the desired/expected output then it appears (to the INFJ) like an attack on the validity of their input. In this sense, the (perceived or real) toxicity of the relationship begins to undermine the sense of self of the INFJ. It threatens their understanding of themselves (what sort of person they really are) and of how the world works (how to read human behaviour and how successful interaction works). When things go too far, they shut out those negative reflections of themselves in order to overcome this situation. I can see why this is wholly justified in their heads - it makes sense.

    What others have been critical about is the fact that (in their eyes) the INFJ is simply running from things; that they're turning their back on someone simply don't like what they're hearing and don't like how it makes them look. It seems like they're closing their eyes, and covering their ears when someone else draws attention to their own flaws too much. It is a refusal to own those (possible) flaws and is a denial of their own (potential) role in creating the conflict. It seems like a way of making themselves into the good-guy and the other person the bad-guy, whilst denying the possibility of anyone ever revising or rectifying this view.

    I want to emphasize that I think the "doorslam" is not automatically a negative thing. I see it as a pattern of behaviour, a way of dealing with certain kinds of interactions and the feelings the arise from it. I think in certain circumstances it might be totally justified. I agree that it probably doesn't happen often for most INFJs - it's typically a last resort. I think perhaps, that what the NPs are also discussing in part is the fact that there are lesser forms of it (and are combining the two ideas in together). Sometimes, it might not be a total shutdown but a sort of "block" that sometimes comes down, that prevents INFJs from truly, openly engaging with the content offered. It feels like you're speaking but they're not really listening, even though they may be replying. On the receiving end, it can feel much like the sort of arrogant dismissal of one's argument/belief/ideas that INTJs can sometimes engage in - like when they can't just disagree with you, they must make you feel small and backwards for thinking differently to them, and in return make themselves superior. It's like your, potentially quite viable/justifiable, alternative view of things is so threatening to their own, that they must dismiss it (and you) utterly and completely in order for them to feel secure. I emphasize that this is just how it feels, and does not necessarily reflect on what is intended.



    *I'm going to offer a possible explanation, so forgive me if I'm wrong - I'm just trying to nut it out and don't mean to sound presumptuous. Feel free to correct me or make alterations.
    INFP 4w5 so/sp

    I've dreamt in my life dreams that have stayed with me ever after, and changed my ideas;
    they've gone through and through me, like wine through water, and altered the colour of my mind.

    - Emily Bronte

  3. #1153
    Senior Member Array yeghor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,433

    Default

    @Southern Kross ;

    You are missing the "intent" component...if the interaction turns to tit for tat mentality there's nothing to be gained in that relationship...it's defacto over...

    I wish you would answer the questions in my model, it would really help to establish some common ground to take the discussion forward...

    replying on phone so have to keep it short cheers...

  4. #1154
    Away with the fairies Array Southern Kross's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 so/sp
    Posts
    2,912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yeghor View Post
    You are missing the "intent" component...if the interaction turns to tit for tat mentality there's nothing to be gained in that relationship...it's defacto over...
    Wait, you want my intent? If so do you mean when I'm feeling "doorslamed" or now my intent in discussing the subject now. Do you mean you need me to say how I think you should deal with the situation?

    I wish you would answer the questions in my model, it would really help to establish some common ground to take the discussion forward...

    replying on phone so have to keep it short cheers...
    Wow, OK. It's just that I thought I was moving towards that stuff. I'm trying the best to understand your perspective and what the communication problems surrounding it without making it about me (which is a common annoyance people have with Fi). Also I thought the style of your questions weren't likely to get a useful or satisfactory response out of me (ie. in the way that would be compatible with Ni-Fe). So I thought step by step analysis would make things clearer and would outline the factors involved more clearly. I'll answer them but this is going to be missing all the complexities...

    a) What part(s) of this definition is causing the problem?
    It only describes the surface actions involved, which misses the point entirely. This just generally describes estrangement or a bad break up. The most central aspects of "doorslamming" is the way in which it's done.

    b) Modify the definition to represent the ideal/proper way to handle the relationship...
    See these questions aren't going to work, because I disagree with definition too much to really answer this meaningfully. Sorry.

    c) Under what conditions would the original "doorslam" approach be acceptable?
    Many circumstances. My main example would be in situations where someone has commited an act of serious betrayal. There are probably other examples but I can't think of them now (I also think it very much depends on the particulars). Although in most situations where it is understandable, I do not necessarily see it as the preferable way to deal with things.
    INFP 4w5 so/sp

    I've dreamt in my life dreams that have stayed with me ever after, and changed my ideas;
    they've gone through and through me, like wine through water, and altered the colour of my mind.

    - Emily Bronte

  5. #1155
    Senior Member Array yeghor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,433

    Default

    The belowgiven model is based on Mane's description of doorslam, I was referring to this model:

    Quote Originally Posted by yeghor View Post

    So there are 2 parties...A and B...

    ManeDoorslam = B wants to end the relationship with A based on own deductions but A tells B that B's deductions are incorrect/mistaken so B shouldn't...B insists on own deductions and ends the relationship anyway and refuses A's prospective attempts to initiate contact...A believes that B could not accept A's deductions about B because they conflicted with B's self image/own deductions/perceptions...

    So please in as brief and simple terms as possible:

    a) Are A's deductions correct?

    b) Are B's deductions correct?

    c) Could the reverse be true? That A could not handle B's deductions because they conflicted with A's self image/own deductions/perception?

    d) How to identify the true circumstances of the relationship independent of A and B?

    e) How should A and B decide individually whether to maintain or end the relationship?
    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Kross View Post
    that they're turning their back on someone simply don't like what they're hearing and don't like how it makes them look. It seems like they're closing their eyes, and covering their ears when someone else draws attention to their own flaws too much. It is a refusal to own those (possible) flaws and is a denial of their own (potential) role in creating the conflict. It seems like a way of making themselves into the good-guy and the other person the bad-guy, whilst denying the possibility of anyone ever revising or rectifying this view.
    What I mean by intent is the intent behind A telling B things that B would not like to hear and would not like how it would make B look...I have a problem with the word "like" here by the way...it's not about liking the words or the perspective...it is about the intent for which those words and perspectives are uttered...

    Are the negative things about B voiced out as a separate grievance or to deflect a grievance raised by B?

    That's what I meant by "tit for tat" mentality...

    For instance: B: You are lying, insulting, condescending to me etc how can you do this to me?....A: You did those things to me as well in such and such past instances (subtext: you are also a lying, insulting, condescending person yourself as well as a hyprocrite) which means your grievance is invalid...we are even?...WTF...Why continue such a relationship at all then?

    Two wrongs don't make a right...Regardless whether A's accusations hold water or whether they make B feel bad, it doesn't make B's grievance go away...it doesn't address/resolve B's grievance...it doesn't absolve A of responsibility either...it OTOH dissolves the relationship...a relationship based on lies...so why hate B when B officially ends a relationship that, in spirit, has already ended...(i.e. faith/goodwill lost in reference to earlier posts...)

    You were assuming that all negative things uttered by A about B are aimed at voicing out and resolving A's grievance so that the damaged relationship can be repaired...and that B is running away because B cannot or does not want to deal with the grievance that A voiced out...That is not "always" the case...

    In fact, in case of doorslams it is rather about A's tendency to deflect grievances with counter-grievances forcing the relationship grievances (you do it too, you misunderstood I did not mean it that way, you are too sensitive, you are not thinking clearly etc.) into a deadlock...rather than owning up B's grievance and display a willingness to deal with it...and these repetitive instances forming a pattern in B's mind implying that at this rate the grievances will never be resolved...it will turn into a gangrane...so why maintain the (toxic?) relationship at all?

    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Kross View Post
    I think perhaps, that what the NPs are also discussing in part is the fact that there are lesser forms of it (and are combining the two ideas in together). Sometimes, it might not be a total shutdown but a sort of "block" that sometimes comes down, that prevents INFJs from truly, openly engaging with the content offered. It feels like you're speaking but they're not really listening, even though they may be replying. On the receiving end, it can feel much like the sort of arrogant dismissal of one's argument/belief/ideas that INTJs can sometimes engage in - like when they can't just disagree with you, they must make you feel small and backwards for thinking differently to them, and in return make themselves superior. It's like that, potentially quite viable/justifiable, alternative view of things is so threatening to their own, that they must dismiss it (and you) utterly and completely in order to feel secure. I emphasize that this is just how it feels, and does not necessarily reflect on what is intended.
    I do not think that this is an INFJ-specific behaviour...I would be more inclined to discuss this if you detached it from INFJs...All types can act this way on things that they feel passionate about...for instance, INFJs: Ni-Ti deductions...INFPs:Fi-Si deductions...INTJs: Ni-Fi deductions? etc...the block you mention might appear in any type when they feel that the other party is trying to impose/strongarm onto them the other's convictions about an issue they also feel passionate about...

    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Kross View Post
    The most central aspects of "doorslamming" is the way in which it's done.

    See these questions aren't going to work, because I disagree with definition too much to really answer this meaningfully.
    If you do not agree with the "ManeDoorslam" model...please revise it in a simple way from your perspective...so we can discuss a model about doorslam that we can all agree on...

    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Kross View Post
    Many circumstances. My main example would be in situations where someone has commited an act of serious betrayal. There are probably other examples but I can't think of them now (I also think it very much depends on the particulars). Although in most situations where it is understandable, I do not necessarily see it as the preferable way to deal with things.
    Would you consider lying, remarks intended not to voice out grievance but to cause emotional hurt serious betrayal? Especially when they are repetitive, forming a pattern?
    Last edited by yeghor; 01-16-2014 at 07:50 AM. Reason: Italics added

  6. #1156
    Vulnerability Array Eilonwy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4 sp/so
    Posts
    5,912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eilonwy View Post
    As for "give Mane a second chance", that's not quite what my goal is. I'm not asking everyone to be friends with him, it's more about understanding him and his pov in order to have a different and more productive conversation than the previous one. To somehow get past "Mane is an asshole, ignore him or fix him." and have a discussion instead.
    I realized I need to add to what my goal is in this thread. Besides understanding @Mane and his pov in order to get past the "fix him" part of things, I would like for INFJs to be able to then start examining their own inner workings from a point of view that's not their own. I think that examination can be done without making yourself vulnerable to anyone but yourself. The choice to be vulnerable to others by posting any insights would be entirely up to each individual. That's the discussion that I would like to have.

    This is only my goal, no one else's. Everyone is free to choose their own goals for participating in this thread, or to not participate in this thread at all.


    ETA: Examining myself from another point of view was not about debasing myself or other INFJs, but about improving myself. If my mind is wired with a tendency to doorslam as a solution to whatever the problem is, and that solution actually keeps me from having healthy relationships, then figuring out how my mind works is going to benefit me in the long run. Looking at this from my own point of view was only causing me to justify and whitewash my own thinking. I had to step outside of myself in order to see a little deeper and more objectively. So, the doorslam isn't about the behavior of other people, it's about my response to the behavior of other people. And deeply examining that response--automatic or not, conscious or not--getting past that blind spot, might provide enough insight to allow me to find other solutions that will allow me to have healthier relationships, or just be a happier, more content person. What I did actually got rid of a lot of the "white noise" for me. And my automatic emotional reactions to criticism aren't nearly as strong as they were, which is a relief. I'm sure I'll still react strongly at times, but, overall, it's an improvement. For me and probably for the people who have to deal with me.

    Yes, I've had to give up some control, which means dealing with things as they come up (yikes! spontaneity!), which isn't always comfortable, but I think I've gained more than I gave up. YMMV
    Johari / Nohari

    “That we are capable only of being what we are remains our unforgivable sin.” ― Gene Wolfe

    reminder to self: "That YOU that you are so proud of is a story woven together by your interpreter module to account for as much of your behavior as it can incorporate, and it denies or rationalizes the rest." "Who's in Charge? Free Will and the Science of the Brain" by Michael S. Gazzaniga

  7. #1157
    Iron Maiden Array fidelia's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1w2 so/sx
    Posts
    9,415

    Default

    I think that you've done a good job Southern Kross of breaking that down, and to me it does sound accurate!

  8. #1158
    reborn Array PeaceBaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    937 so/sx
    Posts
    6,151

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yeghor View Post
    "My perception of the word doorslam is when you cut someone out of your life entirely without warning and with no communication after."

    So there are 2 parties...A and B...

    Doorslam = B ends the relationship with A without any heads-up (prior dialogue?) and refuses A's prospective attempts to initiate contact...

    So please in as brief and simple terms as possible:

    a) What part(s) of this definition is causing the problem?

    b) Modify the definition to represent the ideal/proper way to handle the relationship...

    c) Under what conditions would the original "doorslam" approach be acceptable?
    a) The A / B thing is too simplistic.
    b) The scope of this question is far too limited.
    c) One where A will not talk to B? Abuse. But now you're going to get tied up in the semantics of abuse.
    "Remember always that you not only have the right to be an individual, you have an obligation to be one."
    Eleanor Roosevelt


    "When people see some things as beautiful,
    other things become ugly.
    When people see some things as good,
    other things become bad."
    Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching

  9. #1159
    reborn Array PeaceBaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    937 so/sx
    Posts
    6,151

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Kross View Post
    I think perhaps, that what the NPs are also discussing in part is the fact that there are lesser forms of it (and are combining the two ideas in together). Sometimes, it might not be a total shutdown but a sort of "block" that sometimes comes down, that prevents INFJs from truly, openly engaging with the content offered. It feels like you're speaking but they're not really listening, even though they may be replying.
    Yes. It's a spectrum to the doorslam. There's a lot of grey regions before the doorslam event, and an INFJ might say they're not a doorslammer but they freely engage in the behaviours that are on the spectrum. Like ripples in a pond, concentric circles. I like the idea that came up in another thread of the tier system. I see it as a series of concentric circles that the closer you are to the center, the closer you are in the INFJ trusted world. The closer you are to the center, the more "bad behaviour" is tolerated, whilst oxymoronically, this "bad behaviour" is noted, accumulates and is not easily forgiven. What really screws this system up is that since the inner circles are usually wholly dedicated to spouse and family, someone being repeatedly and intentionally "bad" in this circle makes reconciling what an INFJ feels they should do for self-preservation very difficult, if not nearly impossible. These concentric circles are more reflective the closer you get to the center too. The reflection that comes back serves to bounce the negative images around in very tight spaces.

    People can really hurt INFJ's in this space. It of course nicely explains why many people are held more in the outer perimeters.
    "Remember always that you not only have the right to be an individual, you have an obligation to be one."
    Eleanor Roosevelt


    "When people see some things as beautiful,
    other things become ugly.
    When people see some things as good,
    other things become bad."
    Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching

  10. #1160
    wants Mifune clone minion Array Z Buck McFate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    MBTI
    INfJ
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    3,168

    Default

    [Again, with disclaimer I haven't read all posts.]



    This thing about doorslamming because an INFJ doesn’t like hearing something unflattering- it seems like peculiar turn to take in this discussion. But then maybe that’s why Eilonwy made this comment about the language INFJs were using: “Words like survival, self-preservation, shame, harm, damage, dominate, and power-play. Strong words. Catastrophic words.” It stunned me a bit at first because it seemed mocking, which is really out of character for E. But if that’s what “doorslam” has been in her mind since the topic started back up- not someone getting away from an unhealthy relationship, but someone unconsciously gravitating away from information that isn’t flattering- then it makes a little more sense.

    I do agree that this happens, and I have had it happen to me- an INFJ friend interpreted things as said as being negative feedback about her, and instead of being willing to talk about it she simply stopped contacting me. She changed her phone number every couple of years because she did this regularly to so many people- it was even a joke the first few years about how I ‘made the cut’ of people who got the new number. As I've said before (in this very thread)- it’s one thing to back away because a relationship is unhealthy/unbalanced and conflict can’t be worked out, and it’s another thing to back away because someone doesn’t have the image we like to thing others have of us. The latter is an unconscious defense mechanism; in the previous/linked post I used “coping mechanism”, but “defense mechanism” works better because it really isn’t a conscious action. Defense mechanisms are when people gravitate towards a belief that feels better because their needs aren’t being met, the way that plants gravitate towards growing in the direction of sunlight.

    And the problem (as I said before) with pointing this out is that defense mechanisms can’t be taken away by pointing them out: they’re invisible. You have to find some way to fill the needs those defense mechanisms are compensating for if you want them to become visible. My whole point here is that coming into this thread to guide the INFJs who do this particular kind of doorslam into ‘the light’ is….I don’t know, it seems fruitless to me. Because the kinds of INFJs who show up here to honestly talk about it are the kind who do it more for the self-preservation (they feel an obligation to others, but will doorslam to get rid of unhealthy/unbalanced relationships) reasons- not the flightier reason of needing to have a certain self-image reinforced.
    Reality is a collective hunch. -Lily Tomlin

    5w4 sx/sp Johari / Nohari

Similar Threads

  1. When any type other than INFJ doorslams you/cuts you out of their life
    By SilkRoad in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: 02-03-2014, 11:26 PM
  2. [INFJ] INFJ Daily Life: Plans, Strangers,etc?
    By plaminal in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 11-13-2011, 12:13 AM
  3. [MBTItm] INFJ negotiating mid-life
    By Immaculate Cloud in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-21-2009, 09:04 PM
  4. [INFJ] INFJ, inner life a little too rich?
    By littledarling in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 02-18-2009, 02:23 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •