Type Shaming Threads

[Mal12345]

I've been wondering the same. It's almost as unsettling as overly realistic mannequins that make you think they're real people in the corner of your eye.

Edit: retard moment. I thought this was about Mal's avatar lmfao. Jake is Jake, I can deal.

A lot of kids here haven't seen Big Trouble In Little China.

 

[Starry]

I strongly agree with this point.

Some of the biggest learning experiences I've had here have been times when I've come and vented about a certain type. I had had some pretty bad experiences with an INFJ a little while back, and went on a multi-page tear about it. It led to a situation where I had to actually evaluate some of the bullshit I was spewing in the presence of real life people as opposed to some amalgamation of concepts in my head. By the end, I realized that most of what I had posted wasn't reflective of anything real.

That said, I recognize that what I did was unfair and caused needless distress, even if it did result in a teachable moment. If I had to do it again, I would have done more to frame my opinion within the context of my experience. I think what [MENTION=14857]fia[/MENTION] is pointing to as the problem is maybe the only thing that could make these kinds of rants forgivable. If someone says, "Look, my XKCD ex did such and such a thing. How much of their horrible is type-related, and how much of it is just because they were a dirtbag?" I feel people would be much less likely to take it personally even if they shared a type with the ex.

Knowing someone's intended purpose can make a difference. I don't think it's fair, for instance, to lump [MENTION=26674]theforsaken[/MENTION]'s post on offense and Fe with some of the other threads that have popped up as of late, because I got the impression her goal was actually understanding something about extraverted feeling. It doesn't serve anyone to cut off possibly uncomfortable subjects of conversation simply because they're uncomfortable, especially if those participating in the thread can agree on the value of engaging with the subject matter.

Speaking to the OPs point, being disrespectful to other people, or being destructive just because, is an issue. Maybe a way to address this would be to challenge posters on what they're trying to achieve. "Ok, XKCDs are all evil, soul sucking narwhales. Noted. What else were you trying to get out of this conversation? What sort of discussion were you seeking besides validation of what you already think?" Etc.

Just my $.02.

There definitely needs to be room to make mistakes. <-It's weird because when I first typed that out I was thinking primarily about new people... but then you and I both have taken hits while doing a pretty damn good job if you ask me haha of traversing TypoC's changing culture. You do not want to go "kickin it old skool" in what is now the wrong way haha don't forget yourself like that. But if it happens there needs to be forgiveness for the old timers as well.

There's no immediate response that can be given here but it is good to keep this in mind I guess... that it's pretty common for new people to unknowingly start what so often qualifies as a 'shaming thread' when considering what is written here. Usually an ex thread...or "Why did God Make all Intuitives Perfect?" or "New INTP Here! to Talk About MBTI & IQ for No Particular Reason"

^I've never known how to respond to these kind of things which you know and that thread you brought up is a good example although...I think I was reacting to image there but didn't know it so it was a misfire on my part (I never went back but saw it continued so I thought that was good). I never know what to do when I'm not confused haha about what's actually causing me anger... because I've actually seen the "reasonable" way fail more often. Why? Because they don't know enough about these systems or even the language of MBTI, etc. to even make sense of it so future "Why am I an Advanced Being?" threads are started and contrasts follow oh the joy of it! I've noticed that when a well-intended but fucking-up new member takes a few hits they are alerted to having unknowingly caused hurt and in turn doesn't do *that thing* until they understand what *that thing* is. <-Not saying that's the route we should go but to my surprise that is the route that appears to work best for all involved.

Anyway, room for mistakes.

I'm forgetting all the points I wanted to make dude. We kinda have an automatic contrast system here...we need to keep that in mind. Basically, there's a lot here that will look like shaming when it isn't.

 

[ChocolateMoose123]

I think everyone does a good job of vetting a thread to get the truth out of it, the motive of the OP.

I don't see type shaming threads as that big a deal. forsaken got a bit of heat for his/her Fi/Fe thread but I never thought it was malicious but he/she was tested and that was eventually seen and you know, that's okay too because some OP's are tested for sincerity and can't pass.

I think people are defensive, for some good reasons but I also think a step back or questioning is inherent in reaction.

After one or two posts you can tell the motive of the OP pretty easily. Normally, if they don't share or give anything to differing opinions, go back and forth, adding or taking away from their original premise? It's obvious they are shit-stirring. Then what? Meh. Move on...or play

 

[Mal12345]

There definitely needs to be room to make mistakes. <-It's weird because when I first typed that out I was thinking primarily about new people... but then you and I both have taken hits while doing a pretty damn good job if you ask me haha of traversing TypoC's changing culture. You do not want to go "kickin it old skool" in what is now the wrong way haha don't forget yourself like that. But if it happens there needs to be forgiveness for the old timers as well.

There's no immediate response that can be given here but it is good to keep this in mind I guess... that it's pretty common for new people to unknowingly start what so often qualifies as a 'shaming thread' when considering what is written here. Usually an ex thread...or "Why did God Make all Intuitives Perfect?" or "New INTP Here! to Talk About MBTI & IQ for No Particular Reason"

^I've never known how to respond to these kind of things which you know and that thread you brought up is a good example although...I think I was reacting to image there but didn't know it so it was a misfire on my part (I never went back but saw it continued so I thought that was good). I never know what to do when I'm not confused haha about what's actually causing me anger... because I've actually seen the "reasonable" way fail more often. Why? Because they don't know enough about these systems or even the language of MBTI, etc. to even make sense of it so future "Why am I an Advanced Being?" threads are started and contrasts follow oh the joy of it! I've noticed that when a well-intended but fucking-up new member takes a few hits they are alerted to having unknowingly caused hurt and in turn doesn't do *that thing* until they understand what *that thing* is. <-Not saying that's the route we should go but to my surprise that is the route that appears to work best for all involved.

Anyway, room for mistakes.

I'm forgetting all the points I wanted to make dude. We kinda have an automatic contrast system here...we need to keep that in mind. Basically, there's a lot here that will look like shaming when it isn't.

Social mistakes? Not relevant unless they violate the forum rules. Also, I had some positive feedback from a mod about my "old school" style. Maybe it was just nostalgia for the [MENTION=1]Haight[/MENTION] days. To be old school is not a sin.

- - - Updated - - -

I think everyone does a good job of vetting a thread to get the truth out of it, the motive of the OP.

I don't see type shaming threads as that big a deal.

It's only a big deal for certain personality types.

 

[ChocolateMoose123]

It's only a big deal for certain personality types.

Yeah but what does that say? They are right or wrong? Better or worse?

I mean. Yeah. Some types are more sensitive about certain propositions. But shit. I see plenty of NT/ST's jump on inconsistencies in arguments. Their backs bristle same way an NF/SF does to perceived shaming or what have you.

I don't see much difference in this regard if we are comparing types. But that's me.

 

[Yama]

It's only a big deal for certain personality types.

Si and Fe are already stereotyped to death and I've been putting in work to try and clear up those stereotypes and teach people about what those functions (particularly Si) actually are. Naturally I'm going to get upset when I see the overly stereotyped spreading of misinformation like in your threads, because it's like you're trying to undo all of the work I've done. Obviously you didn't make those threads to spite me specifically, but your framing and persistence that everyone with that function is guilty of the unhealthy traits of a function with no exceptions is damaging. I wouldn't have been *as* irritated if you didn't project motivations onto me and tell me manipulative things along the lines of "you're hiding a dark evil secret" and "you're going to grow up to be a bad person." If you want to say that unhealthy Fe types do that--fine. But you weren't saying it was just the unhealthy ones--you were saying it was all of them. Where I believe you crossed the line is when you started telling me who I am and telling me these psychologically harmful things simply because you knew someone else of the same type who was that way.

 

[Starry]

Social mistakes? Not relevant unless they violate the forum rules. Also, I had some positive feedback from a mod about my "old school" style. Maybe it was just nostalgia for the [MENTION=1]Haight[/MENTION] days. To be old school is not a sin.

I think you might have misunderstood my post. If it were up to me I would go back to TypoC circa 2010

Not necessarily in that specific post but ultimately I'm trying to present alternatives to making your kind of threads against the FAQs ...and don't make me regret having taken the time please.

I don't have a problem with controversial methods and material. And I have already stated in this thread that I would hate to see go "the bad and the ugly" as it pertains to people's perceptions of my type because I learn a great deal from it.


I'm more old skool than you...new skooler.

 

[Mal12345]

I think you might have misunderstood my post. If it were up to me I would go back to TypoC circa 2010

Not necessarily in that specific post but ultimately I'm trying to present alternatives to making your kind of threads against the FAQs ...and don't make me regret having taken the time please.

I don't have a problem with controversial methods and material. And I have already stated in this thread that I would hate to see go "the bad and the ugly" as it pertains to people's perceptions of my type because I learn a great deal from it.


I'm more old skool than you...new skooler.

I'm more objective than you. And objectively speaking, I decided that the Fi type needed a spanking.

 

[Mal12345]

Si and Fe are already stereotyped to death and I've been putting in work to try and clear up those stereotypes and teach people about what those functions (particularly Si) actually are. Naturally I'm going to get upset when I see the overly stereotyped spreading of misinformation like in your threads, because it's like you're trying to undo all of the work I've done. Obviously you didn't make those threads to spite me specifically, but your framing and persistence that everyone with that function is guilty of the unhealthy traits of a function with no exceptions is damaging. I wouldn't have been *as* irritated if you didn't project motivations onto me and tell me manipulative things along the lines of "you're hiding a dark evil secret" and "you're going to grow up to be a bad person." If you want to say that unhealthy Fe types do that--fine. But you weren't saying it was just the unhealthy ones--you were saying it was all of them. Where I believe you crossed the line is when you started telling me who I am and telling me these psychologically harmful things simply because you knew someone else of the same type who was that way.

So I didn't specify neurotic types. So what. Shoot me later if you want.

 

[Yama]

So I didn't specify neurotic types. So what. Shoot me later if you want.

Completely missed the point, but w/e. If you don't understand what I'm saying by now then you either never will or don't want to. I lean towards the latter. Carry on. I'm done. There's nothing more to add.

 

[Mal12345]

Completely missed the point, but w/e. If you don't understand what I'm saying by now then you either never will or don't want to. I lean towards the latter. Carry on. I'm done. There's nothing more to add.

I responded to "but your framing and persistence that everyone with that function is guilty of the unhealthy traits of a function with no exceptions." I never made that assertion, I never implied it. It's the result of people reading what they want into my posts.

 

[Yama]

I responded to "but your framing and persistence that everyone with that function is guilty of the unhealthy traits of a function with no exceptions." I never made that assertion, I never implied it. It's the result of people reading what they want into my posts.

*sigh* Do I really need to spell this out for you? Fine. No, you did not assert it. But it was implied.

I have other Fe examples, not just my father. But let's lay that aside for now. Let's say you're not a two-faced drunk who beats his wife.

implies that the FJs natural state is to be "a two-faced drunk who beats his wife." The wording is also incredibly condescending.

Here's also a tally of our back-and-forth of you accusing me of hiding a dark socially unacceptable secret (which also goes with the implication/accusation that I am an unhealthy FJ despite that you don't even know me) and ends with you pretty much telling me I'm a bad person like the other ISFJ you know because of my type (though you did not use that wording):

I am not fucking inauthentic. I am not living a lie. I am not at all being untrue to myself. Fe has nothing to do with this.

Still, there is a layer of something that you're hiding from yourself. I've known Fe types to completely submerge their childhoods, for example, although not volitionally. Whatever it is, you've pushed it out of consciousness and are using society to shield yourself from it. And it's going to come out in some way.

No. I am not hiding anything from myself. Do not try to tell me that I'm doing this when I've already denied it. Probably the only thing I've ever prided myself on is the fact that I'm completely honest about who I am.

I'm saying you're hiding something about yourself that is not socially acceptable. It could be something as harmless as a desire.

I'm really not though... I'm even open about my gender dysphoria.

Everybody is hiding something. I didn't specify lying in the thread title. I'm talking about the Fe-specific form of hiding something which is to try to put something over on themselves/others in the form of living a lie, inauthenticity, appearances, and empty social forms.

How many times do I have to say that I'm not living a lie, being inauthentic and presenting a fake me to others for the sake of social conformity before you actually believe that I know myself best lol? Just because your dad or whatever other FJs you know did this doesn't mean all FJs are like that.

But I have seen an FJ type suddenly realize her whole life has been a lie.

So your sample size is like, one, two people? And you're applying it to millions? Ok.

You'll see when it happens to you, some day.

 

[Mal12345]

*sigh* Do I really need to spell this out for you? Fine. No, you did not assert it. But it was implied.



implies that the FJs natural state is to be "a two-faced drunk who beats his wife." The wording is also incredibly condescending.

Here's also a tally of our back-and-forth of you accusing me of hiding a dark socially unacceptable secret (which also goes with the implication/accusation that I am an unhealthy FJ despite that you don't even know me) and ends with you pretty much telling me I'm a bad person like the other ISFJ you know because of my type (though you did not use that wording):

You left out a quote:

 

[Bush]

Here's also a tally of our back-and-forth of you accusing

I have faith that most people who read that train of thought immediately rolled their eyes and dismissed it as total bullshit, and that it had no impact on what they thought of FJs.

That applies to all of the more outlandish type shaming things in general: that folks actually do recognize more of the bullshit than we give them credit for. Not all of it, of course, but enough to provide some hope that type shaming is manageable.

 

[Yama]

I have faith that most people who read that train of thought immediately rolled their eyes and dismissed it as total bullshit, and that it had no impact on what they thought of FJs.

That applies to all of the more outlandish type shaming things in general: that folks actually do recognize more of the bullshit than we give them credit for. Not all of it, of course, but enough to provide some hope that type shaming is manageable.

It is difficult for me to have faith that people will be able to discern the bullshit typology from real typology when I repeatedly see the same stereotypes about the same things plastered everywhere without correction. Wtf now I'm debating having a 1 fix

I hope so badly that your faith isn't misplaced because I'd rather you be right.

 

[Bush]

For me, it always comes back to personal responsibility. The reader always has the power to choose whether or not to engage with the OP and on what terms. Wanting to help someone else doesn't require you to be their punching bag.

If some person is shitting up other people's threads with negative bullshit, that's more problematic to me, but not necessarily harder to deal with. They can always be reported or ignored.

This is also the best post I've read all day, but for a different reason than [MENTION=4050]ceecee[/MENTION].

It'd be nice, but we can't force someone to hit that "Ignore" button. (Like, we've actually (basically) tried to do just that. It doesn't work.)

 

[Virgo1987]

Point is - if this kind of behavior and these personal attacks are allowed to slide then I'm less inclined to contribute something of actual worth here.

Because why should I willingly spend my time hanging around a place where it's okay to tell other people that they're inherently fucked up and going to do terrible things simply because they are x type? Because apparently that's okay here.

I actually left after I thought I'd stay away a month ago or so.

I have tried to figure out functions as best as I can since I'm new and I've also tried to write things as fairly as I can -- and I still have people that entirely confuse me or make me feel stupid.

I'm new though so I understand that new people aren't always so well accepted.

Hope it gets better for you.

 

[Virgo1987]

*sigh* Do I really need to spell this out for you? Fine. No, you did not assert it. But it was implied.



implies that the FJs natural state is to be "a two-faced drunk who beats his wife." The wording is also incredibly condescending.

Here's also a tally of our back-and-forth of you accusing me of hiding a dark socially unacceptable secret (which also goes with the implication/accusation that I am an unhealthy FJ despite that you don't even know me) and ends with you pretty much telling me I'm a bad person like the other ISFJ you know because of my type (though you did not use that wording):

This is exactly the kind of stuff that confuses me... and makes my head hurt.

In.short... how about you back off a little bit? Nothing is more offensive than being told repeatedly something about yourself that isn't true... from a person you've repeatedly told it isn't true.

It's creepy too... telling somebody they're hiding something.

 

[Haven]

Doubt is a really good film, it explores an exchange not unlike this one. Basically all you gotta do to find the truth is repeatedly accuse someone of hiding something and interpret every response as an admission of guilt. As an FJ I feel like it prepared me for the kind of bullshit people try to stick on me over and over again.

 

[ChocolateMoose123]

Doubt is a really good film, it explores an exchange not unlike this one. Basically all you gotta do to find the truth is repeatedly accuse someone of hiding something and interpret every response as an admission of guilt. As an FJ I feel like it prepared me for the kind of bullshit people try to stick on me over and over again.

It's gas lighting.

<normal disagreement>

"Why are you so defensive when you're wrong? You may have some sort of psychological issue to work on."

Those kind of statements....they would get anyone riled up and they are used by manipulators and emotional abusers (or your everyday asshole) to avoid responsibility and deflect.

Can't reason with these people.