[ENFP] ENFPs: Beating 'Em Off with a Stick (Not the ENFP, But Those They Encounter)

[Laurie]

Being happy and having money don't have anything to do with each other. It's really silly to equate the two.

 

[Glycerine]

Just out of curiosity, did I insinuate that w/ my post? I agree w/ that also. You see that constantly in Hollywood.

 

[Laurie]

Well even a rich and famous star can come down with cancer or have a child die or things that most people consider terrible, right? It's not all money. And even if it was, it doesn't make you happy anyway.

(no, wasn't commenting on you, it just obviously doesn't have much to do with this discussion)

 

[JoSunshine]

There is way too much to quote, so generally to simulatedworld:

Given the choice to be Paris Hilton or a starving single mother, of course I would choose to be Paris Hilton, becuase I think it is indeed indisputable that her issues pale in comparison. That being said...If I had to choose between being Paris Hilton and being me, I would choose to be me and it is quite safe to say that Paris Hilton is both richer and more beautiful than I am. Living in a fish bowl, being judged and loosing all sense of privacy sounds awful to me. I personally think that any time a person lives on the fringes of society, there is a price to pay - whether that be the poor, disadvantaged fringe or the rich and famous fringe (amongst others including those of choice and those of circumstance). I am simply saying that I have sympathy for the issues and it is legitimate whether you agree or not, although I respect your choice to not sympathize...although I would be curious to see if your opinion would change if you were being followed around by paparazzi and having woman after woman use you for your money when you thought they actually cared. I would think you would have some complaints about it, not becuase you are you, but simply becuase you are human.

I also want to add that one can be thankful for a privilage, yet awknowledge the challenges of that privilage at the same time. The two can most certainly co-exist.

[end post directed to simulatedworld]


I agree with Southern Kross that there seems to be a lot of projection going on in this thread. Attacks were launched where constructive advice or opinions could have been stated.

Lauren Ashely, people are telling you to relax / take a chill pill etc, not becuase of your opinion, but becuase of the confrentational nature of your posts. If you are being confrentational, there is a pretty good chance you will be confronted.

That's it....

 

[Lauren Ashley]

Lauren Ashely, people are telling you to relax / take a chill pill etc, not becuase of your opinion, but becuase of the confrentational nature of your posts. If you are being confrentational, there is a pretty good chance you will be confronted.

Actually, no one told me to take a chill pill. That was said pages before I arrived here. But thanks for your [unsolicited and unhelpful] advice.

 

[JoSunshine]

See...there it is again.

There was no advice, simply an observation.

 

[Lauren Ashley]

See...there it is again.

Oh, please. I'd much rather be confrontational than arrogant and uninsightful like you.

There was no advice, simply an observation.

Okay, here's some advice: You should actually, you know, observe before stating your "observations." If you had observed, rather than jumping to conclusions, you would've realized that no such comment was directed towards me. Thus your observation/advice/drivel was of no significance.

 

[Southern Kross]

There is way too much to quote, so generally to simulatedworld:

Given the choice to be Paris Hilton or a starving single mother, of course I would choose to be Paris Hilton, becuase I think it is indeed indisputable that her issues pale in comparison. That being said...If I had to choose between being Paris Hilton and being me, I would choose to be me and it is quite safe to say that Paris Hilton is both richer and more beautiful than I am. Living in a fish bowl, being judged and loosing all sense of privacy sounds awful to me. I personally think that any time a person lives on the fringes of society, there is a price to pay - whether that be the poor, disadvantaged fringe or the rich and famous fringe (amongst others including those of choice and those of circumstance). I am simply saying that I have sympathy for the issues and it is legitimate whether you agree or not, although I respect your choice to not sympathize...although I would be curious to see if your opinion would change if you were being followed around by paparazzi and having woman after woman use you for your money when you thought they actually cared. I would think you would have some complaints about it, not becuase you are you, but simply becuase you are human.

I also want to add that one can be thankful for a privilage, yet awknowledge the challenges of that privilage at the same time. The two can most certainly co-exist.

[end post directed to simulatedworld]


I agree with Southern Kross that there seems to be a lot of projection going on in this thread. Attacks were launched where constructive advice or opinions could have been stated.

Lauren Ashely, people are telling you to relax / take a chill pill etc, not becuase of your opinion, but becuase of the confrentational nature of your posts. If you are being confrentational, there is a pretty good chance you will be confronted.

That's it....

Nicely said. My point seems to be lost in the endless nit picking.

I have no issue with people that disagree with me. But if they are obnoxious, hypocritical and high and mighty about it, it gets my back up. And eventually people seem to lose all sense of proportion of the matter at hand.

Why do enfp threads always end up with other types all hot and bothered, arguing tooth and nail about something?

This is a good point. It happens for other types too abeit on smaller scales. It really galls me when seemingly every discussion about ENFPs ends up with, "ENFPs are selfish attention whores!". Its as if people that hate ENFPs only have one exagerated negative attribute do draw on. Then they try to distort everything an ENFP says into 'evidence' of their shittiness as human beings. There is never any meaningful discussion because the narrow-minded haters are putting up walls to undermine the conversation. And they're too busy pursuing their personal agenda to care. I don't see why people can't politely state their opposing opinions without going into bitchy attack mode.

Same goes with every ENFJ thread; which of course always turns into: "they're soooo manipulative!" :rolli:

 

[JoSunshine]

Nicely said. My point seems to be lost in the endless nit picking.

I have no issue with people that disagree with me. But if they are obnoxious, hypocritical and high and mighty about it, it gets my back up. And eventually people seem to lose all sense of proportion of the matter at hand.


This is a good point. It happens for other types too abeit on smaller scales. It really galls me when seemingly every discussion about ENFPs ends up with, "ENFPs are selfish attention whores!". Its as if people that hate ENFPs only have one exagerated negative attribute do draw on. Then they try to distort everything an ENFP says into 'evidence' of their shittiness as human beings. There is never any meaningful discussion because the haters are putting up narrow-minded walls to bog the conversation down. And they're too busy pursuing their personal agenda to care. I don't see why people can't politely state their opposing opinions without going into bitchy attack mode.

Same goes with every ENFJ thread; which of course always turns into: "they're soooo manipulative!" :rolli:

Thank you for bringing some much appreciated sanity and a sense of humanity and civility to this thread. ...I personally appreciate the bit there at the end about ENJFs

 

[Southern Kross]

Umm, great, but that's not what I said and doesn't have anything to do with my point.



That's...also not what I was talking about. I said I don't want to hear people complaining about things that do them a lot more good than bad. You're just repeating the same incorrect interpretation of my post.

I'm talking only about problems that result from conditions which also confer great advantages that outweigh those problems. This does not include the flu or any sort of disease, or any problem that doesn't ALSO confer vastly greater advantage at the same time.



Uh, no, I don't seem to think that. Please reread my last post. You're still missing the point by a mile. The point isn't that your suffering doesn't matter if there's any way it could be worse; the point is that people don't want to hear you bitch about something that does you way more good than bad.

Being rich, for instance, doesn't prevent you from suffering from the flu. If rich people complain about having the flu, that doesn't bother me, because the flu is unrelated to being rich and has no proportional upside. Disease is a real problem that rich people can and do suffer from and may legitimately complain about. Nobody is saying that privileged people can't have real problems; you're just badly misreading context.

If rich people complain about being rich because they hate paying higher taxes, on the other hand, they're being unnecessarily whiny because being rich creates so much more advantage than disadvantage. The source of the tax problem, that wealth, is in itself the very thing that allows the person to maintain his highly pleasurable lifestyle, so having to pay higher taxes is a small price to pay for that kind of advantage.



Somehow you still haven't gotten the real point here. It wasn't that problems that could potentially be worse are invalid just because they could be worse, or that privileged people can never have real problems.

It was that complaining about the relatively minor problems caused by the very same thing that is also responsible for much larger positive things comes off as an annoying/spoiled form of complaining. (e.g., beautiful model complains that being pretty sucks because too many men hit on her...except, oops, that beauty is also directly responsible for her entire successful career and extravagant lifestyle. Not such a big disadvantage now, is it?)

If that model wants wants to complain about having the flu, great. Go for it. Her beauty is not directly responsible for the flu symptoms, and the flu doesn't confer any comparative advantage. So feel free to complain.

As for your flu example, it's still not relevant to my point and never was. "Having the flu sucks because it feels crappy" IS a legitimate complaint because there's no proportional upside to the having the flu. Get it? The problem is with complaining about things that also produce much greater advantages than the relatively minor problems they create, not just dismissing any suffering that could potentially be worse as invalid.

Why are you complaining about straw men when they're the only response you seem to have to my posts? Please, please read more carefully next time.

Its perfectly obvious that the analogy is limited. There was no need to completely deconstruct it with such ferocity. This is a thorough effort to intentionally misunderstand the use of analogy altogether.

I'm tired of this. Can't we return to the actual topic? If you want to further discuss this issue, start a separate thread. Please.

 

[simulatedworld]

Its perfectly obvious that the analogy is limited. There was no need to completely deconstruct it with such ferocity. This is a thorough effort to intentionally misunderstand the use of analogy altogether.

I'm tired of this. Can't we return to the actual topic? If you want to further discuss this issue, start a separate thread. Please.

I don't really understand what you're talking about here. I had already finished that point several posts ago and only continued to defend it further because you stared putting words in my mouth.

Being happy and having money don't have anything to do with each other. It's really silly to equate the two.

Having money doesn't guarantee happiness and not having money doesn't guarantee unhappiness, but since more money = more freedom to do what you want, it's very obvious that there's a correlation between more money and more happiness in a market-driven society, and to pretend otherwise is simply naive.

It's pretty much impossible for a large gain in money to make someone less happy, but it's quite common for it to make someone more happy. Just because money doesn't guarantee happiness doesn't mean there's no correlation between having money and being happy.

Well even a rich and famous star can come down with cancer or have a child die or things that most people consider terrible, right? It's not all money. And even if it was, it doesn't make you happy anyway.

(no, wasn't commenting on you, it just obviously doesn't have much to do with this discussion)

Yes, those things can happen to rich/famous people, and I genuinely feel sorry for them when they do. I'm not telling John Travolta he shouldn't mourn his son's death because he's a famous actor.

But if John Travolta started bitching about how much it sucks to be a famous actor because of [insert trivial problem associated with being a famous actor here], I wouldn't have much sympathy because being a famous actor comes with a lot more advantages than disadvantages.

And dude, about the money thing--yeah, having money won't guarantee that you're happy, but it's obvious that rich people will experience a higher average level of happiness than poor people because money confers more freedom to do what you want when you want.

Are there some poor people out there who are happier than some rich people? Sure, but that's not the point--more money obviously correlates with more happiness; just read some basic sociology data. Rich people are happier on average than poor people, case closed.

 

[OrangeAppled]

How about you actually contribute to the present debate for once rather than inventing your own imaginary one with straw man arguments to boot?

I'd like to see that day

Why do enfp threads always end up with other types all hot and bothered, arguing tooth and nail about something?

NFPs aren't allowed positive qualities on this message board, and anything resembling a negative one will be harped on ad nauseum.... I don't know why that is, but the trend is clear.

Nicely said. My point seems to be lost in the endless nit picking.

I have no issue with people that disagree with me. But if they are obnoxious, hypocritical and high and mighty about it, it gets my back up. And eventually people seem to lose all sense of proportion of the matter at hand.

Certain people on this forum aren't worth your arguments, especially when as reasonable and gracious as yours are presented

 

[Amargith]

So, anyone still in the mood for sharing experiences on the OP, after all this?

 

[Wonkavision]

I've come to realize that I have a particularly salient talent for making people from all walks of life feel comfortable in my presence. Redneck or college professor (and in my home state the two are not mutually exclusive, but I digress), people from all walks of life can feel like my best friend after only one to two conversations.

I would characterize such conversations as ephemeral. And yet, I'm obviously having a more significant emotional impact on these people than I realize or intend.

So here's my question to other ENFPs and those who love them...

How do you balance your innate ability to establish emotional connections with other people with your desire to have MEANINGFUL emotional connections with others? Are you aware that what seems like a casual emotional connection for you, may seem to have more import for the other person? And, if so then what do you do about this?

Please discuss.

- Esoteric Wench

I used to be really enthusiastic with everyone I met. This was natural for me because I was always really interested in people from all walks of life.

I wanted to know all about them, what made them tick.

I wanted to connect with everyone and bond and have deep conversations, etc. etc.

As I've gotten older (I'm 34 years old), I've begun to moderate my enthusiasm when talking to people.

I've even gotten comfortable with not liking certain people, and (gently but firmly) letting them know it.

This is partly because I've been around the block so many times and been through so much bullshit that I'm fairly burnt out on people anyway, but also because it has tremendous benefits.

I don't have the pain in the ass problem of people I don't want to spend time with thinking they're my best friend.

I don't have women thinking I was flirting with them when I wasn't.

And I have more of what I have come to enjoy in recent years--solitude and silence.

If I see friendship potential with someone, I will be my natural enthusiastic self.

If I don't see friendship potential with someone, I will act somewhat aloof.

"But that's inauthentic," you might say.

Well, maybe. And that's why I didn't do it for so long.

But truthfully, when it comes down to it, it works and it makes me happy.

I guess you could call it developing secondary Fi.

I'm clearer about what I want and don't want. I'm more comfortable with making judgements about people.

Also, becoming a husband and father of two kids has solidified what my purpose, goals, and priorities are and who/what I want in my life.

It's hard sometimes because part of me still wants to get along with everyone and to be liked by everyone, but I've learned that it just isn't that big of a deal if people don't like me.

Some people will think I'm cold and aloof and that's OK.

Some people think I'm quiet and boring. Whatever! Let them think that!

It's good for my peace of mind to not send out confusing signals to people.

 

[Amargith]

I think a lot of us ease up over the years. That burning intensity that is so hard to control gets smoother and makes it easier to just not overwhelm and bond with people so intensely immediately. And yes..as you said, Wonka, you do learn to ration your energy for those upon further examination turn out to be those special people that are compabtibel with you for friendship. When you're younger you're still exploring, you have a ton more energy it seems and you try to reach out to everyone. At some point, you've seen how that goes and you also start putting more energy in other things, causing you to conserve it more, and be less of a ball of enthusiasm bouncing through the room

 

[uumlau]

I find this thread fascinating.

People are getting ticked off because the OP seems to be saying, "Oh, woe is me. I'm so popular! It's driving me crazy! How does one deal with the curse of popularity?!"

Yet I have, for most of my life, been a fairly unpopular, nerdy INTJ, and I'm not offended at all by her remarks. Not in the least.

Hmm. I wonder why?

It's probably because I know what she's getting at. As I was growing up, I could have chosen to be more involved with people in general, and decided against it. I liked having a few close friends, and was perfectly happy that way. In fact, I found it rather awkward when people I didn't like seemed to like me, so I pushed them away: gently, but not very nicely, either. Often, I didn't even know I was pushing them away. I wanted connections with a particular few, not with everyone.

In other words, I see the OP's problem in reverse. There's no telling how many good friendships I never had for being that way.

If you read into her post, you see why she is "so popular." She naturally expresses interest in and enthusiasm for other people. Do that, and you'll be popular, guaranteed. People like being liked.

Most people who want such popularity do it backwards. It's like respect: you need to be respectful, first, and then you receive respect. If you demand respect, that's a surefire route to being disrespected. With popularity, if you simply want people to like you first, before you like them, people won't often like you. If you go out and be nice and show an interest in people, they will naturally like you, and you will naturally become more and more popular.

There's a caveat, here: you don't get to choose which of these people will like you in return. There might be one in whom you are very interested, and they just don't seem to respond. There will be those in whom you are uninterested, and they will respond in spite of your lack of real interest.

The problem the OP is having is a very particular one. She's looking for a balance. How to be congenial and express one's natural enthusiasm when meeting people, without implying that one is doing anything more than just being friendly.

My silly answer for her: act more like an INTJ.

My serious answer: for some people, even any reasonably friendly contact will nearly always be interpreted as more significant than you intend. You really can't control that reaction ahead of time, but only deal with it afterward. In some cases, if you particularly don't like a person (or more specifically, don't like the "vibe" a stranger gives off) still be friendly, but just turn your volume to something below "11". Pretend you're more introverted and reserved, though not necessarily aloof. Smile, shake hands, say the appropriate greetings, and then say nothing else. If they engage you, respond politely and briefly. This way, you don't accidentally send an "I really like you" signal, making it clear that if they initiate with you, it's their choice.

What I find interesting for my part, as I develop my Fi side, is that I'm only just starting to learn this over the past few years. I was pushing people away without realizing it. I have to make a conscious effort not to do that. I'm still too shy to really be much friendlier with strangers: I don't think I'll ever get to that point. But now I know that projecting that positive inner-Fi attitude outward is what lets people get to know me, and what lets me get to know them. And, as a final message to the OP, I've learned to let people that I don't initially like to just like me: maybe I don't really know them well enough yet to judge whether they will be good friends. There are not a few that I didn't exactly like at first, who later became good friends.

 

[Lady_X]

Right good point...I guess that is what I do..totally dial it down and just be regular friendly instead of really digging in and creating those bonds with people you're not genuinely interested in becoming close to but also like amargith mentioned and I've said before as well..I think we naturally remain pretty open and treat most people we meet as a potential close friend..cause ya never know haha...that's contradictory isn't it.

 

[SillySapienne]

Oh wow. I can totally relate to that gut feeling about something and then having to sort out actually what you feel/think about it.

That's how real intuition works!!!

At any given momemt, there are so many stimuli/signals/symbols that we receive and, at times, miraculously sort out/synthesize, subconsciously in our heads, but, at that time, we don't cognitively, or linearly understand what our gut feeling is telling us.

Regardless, I have learned to damn near ALWAYS listen to my gut feeling/intuition it's a freakishly accurate barometer of sifting out truth from bullshit, lying from deceit, hell, this feeling even procures correct answers on multiple choice exams. (When I over-analyze the questions and the four potential answers I tend to fuck myself over, so it's best to go with my gut)

I think Ne + Fi or Ti has this exceptional knack for synthesizing multi-faceted chunks of information, this is just a personal theory, but... yeah.

huh. and to think, i was just going to tell the OP that all females have experienced this problem.

Perhaps most EP females have this problem?

 

[SillySapienne]

In other words, I see the OP's problem in reverse. There's no telling how many good friendships I never had for being that way.

If you read into her post, you see why she is "so popular." She naturally expresses interest in and enthusiasm for other people. Do that, and you'll be popular, guaranteed. People like being liked.

Most people who want such popularity do it backwards. It's like respect: you need to be respectful, first, and then you receive respect. If you demand respect, that's a surefire route to being disrespected. With popularity, if you simply want people to like you first, before you like them, people won't often like you. If you go out and be nice and show an interest in people, they will naturally like you, and you will naturally become more and more popular.

Preach it, brother uumlau!!!

I've never wanted to be "popular", in my entire life, in fact, I've always viewed "popularity" to be a hierachical system where sheep obsess and praise these false gods, seriously!!!

Ewwww.

Growing up, and in my day-to-day life, I've found and find that I like all sorts of different people for all sorts of different reasons. I could give two-shits about what their status is.

What uumlau is talking about here is so true that I just don't know what to do with myself!!!

I've always theorized/thought the exact same thing!!!

When you are desperate for people to like and accept you, and are willing to shift your character and compromise your integrity in order to please/impress them, you will achieve two negative things, one being, that you will be/come a pathetic person who needs and feeds on external validation, and the second one being, that you very most likely won't even get the validation that you seek!

 

[SillySapienne]

I've come to realize that I have a particularly salient talent for making people from all walks of life feel comfortable in my presence. Redneck or college professor (and in my home state the two are not mutually exclusive, but I digress), people from all walks of life can feel like my best friend after only one to two conversations.

I would characterize such conversations as ephemeral. And yet, I'm obviously having a more significant emotional impact on these people than I realize or intend.

So here's my question to other ENFPs and those who love them...

How do you balance your innate ability to establish emotional connections with other people with your desire to have MEANINGFUL emotional connections with others? Are you aware that what seems like a casual emotional connection for you, may seem to have more import for the other person? And, if so then what do you do about this?

Please discuss.

- Esoteric Wench

I'm a little confused by your wording.

I have "ephemeral" conversations with random peeps, and what I think you're meaning by ephemeral is fun and fleeting encounters, no?

I think most extroverts do.

Where I am getting lost and confused is by how you distinguish emotional connection between/from meaningful emotional connection.



If I feel emotionally connected to someone, that connection will be and feel meaningful to me, even if that someone doesn't reciprocate that feeling. (Example, unrequited love)

When I let someone in, and like and understand and relate to what I receive from them, get the essence of who they are, even while during a relatively short period of time, I'll inevitably feel a kinship with this person, an emotional bond, an intimacy, a closeness.

I can't recall the many times I've connected with people in the strangest and most mundane contexts.

This exchange is like an existential hug.