[MENTION=6561]OrangeAppled[/MENTION] -- You might want to know that INFJs are no longer perceived as nice, saintly people around here, but as 'pretentious', 'controlling', 'stubborn', 'know-it-all', 'high-strung' crazies, so we're at the receiving end of as much unwarranted flak as INFPs now. So people
are kinda sensitive.
No they're not. They feel that way because of a few, minority posters who dared to criticize.
Their over all rep as a type as compared to, say, an ESFJ is much better still.
If I gave a monkey's butt about things like reputation, then I'd be more concerned over how my comments on INFJs affect views of me, not INFJs. However, I am free from such concerns because I find it impossible to take myself that seriously.
But OA, you are not behaving in line with the "group" of INFPs. If I attacked the entire category prejudiciously, then my statements would be false.
I'm not attacking prejudiciously because I'm not ascribing unrelated aspects to a certain category of people. Is saying "Christians believe Jesus is the Messiah" prejudice? Or "black people tend to have dark skin"? Of course, not ALL do, but that doesn't make these statements prejudice. Personality types are about
personality. That is what they define. So to note personality traits in a type is not prejudice, it's just an observation of what it IS. And EVERY personality has negative flaws, and those have patterns across type, just as strengths do. If you accept patterns of strengths, then why not flaws? Why can these not be noted?
My impression about your communication being snobbish and flippantly bratty apply only to you. I like you personally as a poster and find you often have good insights, but you also cross the line in your behavior. You can certainly call me mean for saying you are bratty, but my comment is in reaction to you behaving that way. Is it mean to tell someone they are being hurtful when hitting someone? You are verbally hitting people and you are being mean, so should I coddle you about it? I didn't think that is what you even want as an INFP who you find to be more "raw" and not politely passive-aggressive. I didn't want to take it passive aggressively by saying that it applies to an entire category of people. That would be completely irrational, and I find your position to be irrational as well because it is simply prejudicial and not insightful. You are often insightful, but not here. Your conclusions are way too extreme and generalized. Even if you have been surfing the net for a decade, there is no way that you know every INFJ and that the extremity of your opinions could apply to each one.
I know you didn't apply that to all INFPs. That was my point - you attacked ME, an actual individual, whereas I made fun of an abstract concept. You really think I am more out of line? I disagree. You made it much more personal. I had humorous intent; you are serious.
Passive-aggressive is not polite. It's a way of dodging accountability for one's words by veiling them in niceties & making implications instead of direct statements. That way, no one can call you on it without you pushing it on them as a misunderstanding. It's way more manipulative. I don't find that polite.
I often find INFJ's "praise" of INFPs & some other types as condescending, like back-handed compliments. This is the disingenuousness I spoke of.
Regarding the no humor comment - I'm not trying to be funny because I think being flippantly mean is far more dismissive than just shooting a straight arrow when someone is behaving below their potential of insight by being prejudicial, unkind, and unreasonable.
Dismissive was my very objective in being flippant in this thread. I'm not being "prejudicial, unkind, and unreasonable". If you're going to pull the "it's your perception" card, then the same could apply here. It's perception I am being that way, when another perception is that I am merely being flippant & taking a mocking tone for the sake of it. In other contexts, I think it's not only FAIR, but important to discuss negatives of types.
If you don't want some angel/devil dichotomy for INFJs, then one way would be not to overreact to any negative comment about your type. Having flaws is human.
Your arguments are so subjective and intangible, that the only style of argument available is "yes, I think they are horrible", "No they are not" "Yes they are because I've been on their site", "No they aren't because I've been on the site too and my impression is different". I gave you the position that I've been on this site as long as it existed and have not seen INFJs behave as you describe. I've never seen one slap down someone crossing the line as I just did. It's probably because I have higher Fi than most other INFJs. The best way I know to "tear down your argument" is to show Exhibit A: The INFJS on this board that are not the way you describe.
We can go to INFJ & INFP message boards & see which has loooong thread(s), some of them pinned, on calling out mistyped people. Is that factual enough for you? That is not a matter of perception, but what actually does & does not exist. I can link threads if you like.... Conversely, INFP forums will likely show no recent thread of any kind, and if one is dug up, there will be little to it.
And I was referring to message boards devoted to each type to note over all "vibes" and trends for a reason. It shows why INFPs would not want to be an INFJ because of trends in their own attitudes.
There is consensus on perceptions as well. Just as INFP boards are frequently noted as being whiny & depressive, INFJ boards are frequently noted as being highly passive-aggressive. Other people make these perceptions as well, with consistency. Ni descriptions themselves include a ton about arrogance & INFJ profiles comments about difficulty with criticism. So these perceptions are in-line with very definitions of the type. It is not prejudice when you're referencing the very definition of something.
A lot of unflattering ideas about INFPs are not pulled out of the sky either. It tends to be an exaggeration or misapplication of something stated about the type in its description.
I don't find INFJs arrogant in a very obvious way, the way most people imagine arrogant, but I'm noting how it can occur (specifically on type forums) & why this would be unappealing for INFPs to identify with. (INFPs have their own patterns of elitism, which I won't elaborate on here.)
It is frustrating that if I approach the problems with your behavior overtly it is "Fe-shaming", but if it is done indirectly it is "passive-aggression". I have addressed your argument extensively in other threads, and I'm tired of it because you have never demonstrated a single inclination to respond at all. You just keep rehashing the same assumptions over and over and over again. This tells me that the problem is with you in some personal way and is not about holding an actual intellectual position.
I never saw you address the argument before, only just now above. Otherwise you just proceed to scold me & tell me you don't like my attitude. That's irrelevant to me in this discussion, so if I ignore it, then that's why. Not liking my attitude doesn't disprove anything I say. It seems a red herring to me to go there.
As for humor - well, I like scathing wit & sometimes, along with absurdities. I may not do it well, but I make an effort because I like it & so do some other people. This is really a matter of taste, which is why making it a moral issue is not something I will buy.
[MENTION=6561]OrangeAppled[/MENTION]
When anyone describes their experience with an MBTI type that is negative, including multiple experiences with a particular type, that information is not verifiable or falsifiable by anyone else. It is your experience and perception and should be accepted as such. My experience and perception with the same type in this instance is different, so who is right? I have zero desire to invalidate anyone's experience, especially if it is painful and unpleasant.
It can be verifiable. As I mentioned, the thread thing is verifiable. Type definitions are verifiable.
This doesn't address that regularly other types get bagged on, in jest or seriously, and those types don't get all in a tizzy over it. I've made much worse criticism of ENTPs, ESFPs & ESTJs here & elsewhere that did not incur such butt-hurt-ness*. INFJs are not a type I am targeting, much as you seem to believe. I do enjoy evening the estimation of all types; it's the egalitarian in me.
* ENTPs made counter-arguments, some outright agreed with it, & still others laughed it off.
Where the line is crossed is when personal experience/perception is universalized. Your experience/perception and mine are both infinitesimally small in the context of the whole of reality. Whatever an INFJ is as an entire category, neither of us knows. Each person should be free to share their experiences with a type, but stop there and not impose those experiences onto new unknown people. Edit: Also in your post that triggered my reaction you appear to be actively trying to get people to think badly about INFJs in general, which is a form of trolling. Sharing experiences is one thing, but this active attempt to tear down an entire type is not right, rational, or reasonable in the least. /Edit
I made fun of INFPs also, and
myself. I assure you, no one else is taking my post as seriously as you are. And it's a drop in the bucket compared to the trash talked about other types & the internet praise for INFJs over all. Welcome to the world of every other type.
The point of my comments, outside of general flippancy, was to note that the "special" hang-up is misapplied to INFPs (or ONLY them), and this is evidenced by thread topics (verifiable) and general tone/attitude towards the topic of rarity (yes, that is MY perception). Or at least, INFJs seem much more hung-up on rarity and who is typed correctly. That attitude in itself is something that would make many an INFP "not want to be an INFJ".
Using my personal perception to explain why I think something should not be taboo.
Not every INFJ wants to do witch-hunts. I will take you at your word that it happens, but please don't universalize it or any other behaviors. Leave those data points exactly as they are in reality and be open to obtain new data points that could contrast with the old ones instead of using confirmation bias to continually reinforce previous assumptions. That goes for all of us that think with MBTI.
Those threads still exist & are going strong. I can reference an actuality if I please. I'm going to share my perceptions, knowing others are not so brainless as to take them at face-value without investigating things themselves. You seem to take perceptions as some kind of irreversible judgment, which they are not. I also gave clear context for my comments - they were based on observations of a forum & included the qualifier "some". You're the one universalizing it...
You're basically telling me to ignore & not note negative things about INFJ forums. Sorry, but INFJs are not exempt from criticism. It's perfectly fair for you to say, "I am not that way", but also note I did not apply my comments to ALL INFJs. SOME are that way, enough to create a certain atmosphere on their forums.
The INFJ forums have a distinctly different tone from the INFP forums, and this difference is significant to why INFPs would not want to be INFJs. I have a hard time seeing too many INFPs hanging out there for very long & feeling like they fit. If there are mistyped people at an INFJ forum, then I'd bet they are likely ENFJ or ISFJ (just as mistyped INFPs are likely ISFP or ENFP, and they frequently change their identification to those types in time).