Distrustful of Fe?

[proteanmix]

It doesnt matter who agrees with what, it only matters what is true. To paraphrase what Jung said in some of the quotations in this thread, people think that quantity without quality makes substance. That if you put many zeroes together, they will somehow make a one. It doesnt matter how many people hold a particular view, it does not have merit unless it is true.

The converse of that is some people believe that if many people agree that something is true, the more people believe it, the less truth it has because truth is some sort of untouchable esoteric blob existing in the outer reaches of the universe that only a limited gifted few have access to. The truth can't possibly be that simple, they think, when it really is. So simple that even children can grasp it.

 

[The_Liquid_Laser]

Bluewing, you are the most striking example I've ever seen of Jung's assertion that "people tend to overvalue their own type".

BlueWing has that special way of saying, "I've studied the matter thoroughly, and now I can authoritatively say that my type is the best."

 

[Totenkindly]

("Welcome to the Jungle," Guns N' Roses)

Ah, Axel Rose -- the poet philosopher for the ages!

 

[Eve]

Example: an FJ and an FP want to buy cake for someone's birthday. Using this extremely simplified example, are you saying that an FJ would buy chocolate cake (because that's what everyone likes) whereas an FP would find out if the person even likes chocolate (because that individual may/may not want chocolate, or may not want a cake at all?) If I'm misunderstanding this, please tell me. I can see how the impersonality of buying the cake would be Fe, because they may go out and buy cake for everyone's birthday, while the FP may only buy a cake for the people they care about.

Fis sometimes come across as rude and insensitive because they tend to ignore etiquette rules. I can see how buying the cake is a way for Fe to show their appreciation, but a Fi (unless they found that important) would skip the cake all together. As I mature, I see more and more the importance of showing through 'symbols' the appreciation I feel towards someone. Before I would just feel it and forget to tell the other person. I see a lot of value in Fe, but it is the function (when not healthy) that aggravates me the most.

This really leads me to believe that either people (including myself: I may be being obtuse about the matter) don't know the difference between Fe and Fi other than textbook definitions or the differences between these two functions break down under close examination. If a Fe's Fi is concerned with others and a Fi's Fi (make sense?) is concerned with helping others then how do you make the distinction?.

Fi would like to connect you to your inner values. For example, a Fi would want you to forget about other people for a moment, in a time of crisis, and would ask you the following question: "What do you want to do? What is important to you?" That's not a simple answer and would require you to do a lot of inner search to answer that question. Fi is more hand off. Worst case scenario - They wont' necessarily be there for you like a Fe would, they would think you're capable of dealing with the crisis on your on and you might feel alone.

In a time of crisis, at least that was the help I got from significant Fes in my life, they help you get through it even if it requires great sacrifice on their part. They are there for you. They have a more directive style though and like to participate in figuring out what is important to. Worst case scenario -They can become frustrated when you don't want follow their advices or don't need them anymore. (I can be wrong here, that's my impression)

They have different approaches. A person in complete despair would benefit a lot from Fe. A person trying to figure out what to do with their lives would benefit from interaction with Fi. That's my take on it so far.

 

[RDF]

Ah, Axel Rose -- the poet philosopher for the ages!

Just chuckling at the thought that I might be expected to morph into some kind of 19th century aristocratic Romantic philosopher in order to live up to BlueWing's expectations of my personality type.

I have my pretensions to education and culture, but I'm also a child of my times. An ex-Marine. A business executive who watches TV while eating supper with the wife. A house in the suburbs, a sedan, an SUV, and a leafblower.

If I push myself hard and really dig deep, I might be able to come up with a pretty good impression of one of the Three Stooges. Will that do?

Or maybe Mick Jagger:

If I could stick my pen in my heart
I would spill it all over the stage
Would it satisfy ya, would it slide on by ya
Would you think the boy is strange? Ain't he strange?
If I could win ya, if I could sing ya
A love song so divine
Would it be enough for your cheating heart
If I broke down and cried? If I cried?
I said I know it's only rock 'n roll but I like it
I know it's only rock'n roll but I like it, like it, yes, I do

 

[Totenkindly]

I have my pretensions to education and culture, but I'm also a child of my times.....

Me, I came of age in the early '80's...

West End Girls (Pet Shop Boys)

Sometimes you're better off dead
There's a gun in your hand and it's pointing at your head
You think you're mad too unstable
Kicking in chairs and knocking down tables
In a restaurant in a West End town
Call the police
There's a madman around
Running down underground to a dive bar
In a West End town

In a West End town a dead end world
The East End boys and West End girls
In a West End town a dead end world
The East End boys and West End girls
West End girls

Too many shadows whispering voices
Faces on posters too many choices
If when why what how much have you got
Have you got it do you get it
If so how often
Which do you choose
A hard or soft option
(How much do you need)...

 

[Ivy]

Just chuckling at the thought that I might be expected to morph into some kind of 19th century aristocratic Romantic philosopher in order to live up to BlueWing's expectations of my personality type.

What about:

Elliot Smith
Anthony Keidis
Adam Sandler
James Taylor

as Fi figures of our times?

 

[RDF]

What about:

Elliot Smith
Anthony Keidis
Adam Sandler
James Taylor

as Fi figures of our times?

The first two are after my time (I only know a couple of their top 40 radio hits). And James Taylor was a soft-rock crooner (I was never a fan).

I like Adam Sandler. He's funny and hardworking. His movie roles play around with the contradiction between the self-sacrificing nice guy and the anger and aggression hidden beneath the surface in all of us. Humor is often about put-downs and thinly-veiled aggression.

Adam Sandler can play the role of "sensitive guy," but he also seems like he has enough of a selfish streak in him to elbow people aside and claim some personal space when people crowd him. I respect that quality and try to practice it frequently in my own life.

Oh well, time for me to quit playing with message boards and get back to my work week.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

Anecdotal observations:

Interestingly enough I grew up in a family with two Fi dominant and one that is Fi rather than Fe, but not sure where it ranks in the line up. When all else is equal and Fe and Fi come into conflict, i 'think' it is more likely that Fe will give in to the wishes of Fi. For example, if Fi feels concern about a choice that a loved Fe is making, they will likely at some point become overwhelmed with this concern and share it unedited with the Fe they care about. This places the person with Fe into a corner of two choices: 1. To continue with their original choice knowing full well the emotional wreckage it will cause Fi, even if the choice does not involve them in any way outside their feelings of concern, or 2. Comply with the wishes of Fi to quell the negative emotion even if Fe does not see any other 'reason' to do this.

Fi in its most intense, passionate mode cannot be easily reasoned with. At least that is my experience. It is indeed sincere, heartfelt, and based on its own method of reason and meaning, but if you conflict with it, there is absolutely nothing that can be said to alter this worldview of Fi. It can be fairly typical to be inadvertedly forced into such ultimatums of change or cause pain, even though that is not the Fi's intent. They aren't thinking about your inner world at that moment, but theirs which is hitting them like a tidal wave.

Anyway, just a thought in the context of very kind people that demonstrates that there isn't one version of Feeling that can make someone feel pressured or intruded, etc. Those scenarios are worth encountering because they help maturity to occur, even if they hurt a little by mistake.

 

[Totenkindly]

Fi would like to connect you to your inner values. For example, a Fi would want you to forget about other people for a moment, in a time of crisis, and would ask you the following question: "What do you want to do? What is important to you?" That's not a simple answer and would require you to do a lot of inner search to answer that question. Fi is more hand off. Worst case scenario - They wont' necessarily be there for you like a Fe would, they would think you're capable of dealing with the crisis on your on and you might feel alone.

That makes very much sense to me, as I look at all the MBTI functions on the grid. INTP and INFP share a sense of autonomy. INTP is creating a model of impersonal reality inside; INFP is creating a model of personal reality. The only differences are due to the T/F factor, but INTP and INFP should share some traits (which includes the "autonomy" thing).

Most INFPs I know seem hesitant to intrude or overwrite someone else's choices or tell them what to do. They understand the need for a person to be true to themselves and include that as part of their decision making.

In a time of crisis, at least that was the help I got from significant Fes in my life, they help you get through it even if it requires great sacrifice on their part. They are there for you. They have a more directive style though and like to participate in figuring out what is important to. Worst case scenario -They can become frustrated when you don't want follow their advices or don't need them anymore.

No, I've experienced that, at least when dealing with xSFJ types. ESFJs tend to be much more involved and show frustration more quickly; ISFJ tends to hold back, but with people they are intimately involved with (and thus can be open with), they show the same tendencies.

And they also are so willing and able to make those large sacrifices. It's so easy for them to lose or ignore themselves in the equation of what must be done.

Just dealing with Rose... whew. I am constantly telling her that she needs to consider what is best for everyone concerned, not just the people with a need, and especially be concerned about what is best for herself instead of constantly ignore her own needs; but when she sees someone with a need that Fe is telling her must be met, you can rest assured that she will be dead before she stops trying to meet the need. It's a wonderful gift... and a terrible curse all at once.

 

[RDF]

Fi in its most intense, passionate mode cannot be easily reasoned with. At least that is my experience. It is indeed sincere, heartfelt, and based on its own method of reason and meaning, but if you conflict with it, there is absolutely nothing that can be said to alter this worldview of Fi. It can be fairly typical to be inadvertedly forced into such ultimatums of change or cause pain, even though that is not the Fi's intent. They aren't thinking about your inner world at that moment, but theirs which is hitting them like a tidal wave.

I agree wholeheartedly. My wife and I are both INFPs. When we clash with each other over something and feel strongly about our positions, it can be a real struggle and a painful sacrifice for either one of us to back down and let go of the issue. And if neither of us can let go, then the atmosphere usually gets pretty poisonous.

One of the best ways we can quickly unwind these kinds of conflicts is to point out instances in the past when the shoe was on the other foot and we were dealing with the same issues from the other sides. (After 7 1/2 years together, such instances can usually be found.) And then it's easy to unwind the conflict once we realize how interchangeable the positions are.

Anyway, just a thought in the context of very kind people that demonstrates that there isn't one version of Feeling that can make someone feel pressured or intruded, etc. Those scenarios are worth encountering because they help maturity to occur, even if they hurt a little by mistake.

Absolutely!

 

[heart]

Fis sometimes come across as rude and insensitive because they tend to ignore etiquette rules. I can see how buying the cake is a way for Fe to show their appreciation, but a Fi (unless they found that important) would skip the cake all together. As I mature, I see more and more the importance of showing through 'symbols' the appreciation I feel towards someone. Before I would just feel it and forget to tell the other person. I see a lot of value in Fe, but it is the function (when not healthy) that aggravates me the most.

An Fi would buy the cake for someone special out of love for them and love for cake and wanting to share a cake, they just wouldn't do just because it is what you always and supposed to do. I wouldn't be the one hauling cakes into the office for any of the women I secretly thought of as b*tches.

I never understood the need to bring personal celebrations into the office. I never liked it and I never told people when it was my birthday for just that reason. If you have a deep and meaningful relationship with someone at work, why not just go out after work and celebrate or at lunch, why the need to force pretend caring between people who don't care about each other?

Fi would like to connect you to your inner values. For example, a Fi would want you to forget about other people for a moment, in a time of crisis, and would ask you the following question: "What do you want to do? What is important to you?" That's not a simple answer and would require you to do a lot of inner search to answer that question. Fi is more hand off. Worst case scenario - They wont' necessarily be there for you like a Fe would, they would think you're capable of dealing with the crisis on your on and you might feel alone.

For someone important to me, I am there and I do ask what can I do to help you. My Fi best friend was the most comfort to me when my Dad passed away. She was just there for me in a quiet and helpful way, without intruding on my grief in the process. The Fe's in my in-law family seemed to NEED so much validation that they were helpful, had the right answers (they didn't) and that I valued their support that I began to avoid them. Having said that, I admit these particular Fe people are extremely underdeveloped.

The two Fe in my family created serious friction between me and my strong T sister and the other Fi sister under the guise of "helping" us to express sympathy to each other. Friction that none of us had the resources to deal with at the time and then the Fe was wanting their validation at being such a wonderful, helpful person and pushing and pushing and pushing and eventually got a verbal corrective from each of us to just back off it, at which time they broke down and wailed that no one appreciated them. They created so much more emotional havoc than the situation called for.

In a time of crisis, at least that was the help I got from significant Fes in my life, they help you get through it even if it requires great sacrifice on their part. They are there for you. They have a more directive style though and like to participate in figuring out what is important to. Worst case scenario -They can become frustrated when you don't want follow their advices or don't need them anymore. (I can be wrong here, that's my impression)

They have different approaches. A person in complete despair would benefit a lot from Fe. A person trying to figure out what to do with their lives would benefit from interaction with Fi. That's my take on it so far.

An Fi would probably take more comfort and benefit from another Fi to whom they were close to. Thinkers can also provide help and comfort in ways that can be very stabilizing at such an emotional time. Of course I imagine a non-neurotic Fe would be very good too, I just have never had the benefit of being close to one.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

An Fi would buy the cake for someone special out of love for them and love for cake and wanting to share a cake, they just wouldn't do just because it is what you always and supposed to do. I wouldn't be the one hauling cakes into the office for any of the women I secretly thought of as b*tches.

I like your cake illustration - i would bring cake for love of the cake.

I do read the basic premise in most of these discussion to be comparing contrasting an iNtuitive style Fi with a Sensing style Fe. It is important to separate out one more level for clarity. What is Sensing style Fi like in relationship to iNtuitive Fe?

I believe myself to be Fe, everything else seems to fit. I did bring in a goody one time for the last class period in a class i was taking at a university because i really enjoyed the class - especially the information, but the people were part of the experience. It was my grand finale for an important experience. I gave everyone a card and goody and someone made the comment "I knew I should have made brownies". It then occurred to me that they may have been judging me as kissingup or something and i went home feeling really embarrassed and wondering why i was so dumb to not catch that before i did it. So that's one example of Fe relating to the bestowing of cake upon unsuspecting people.

Edit: can anyone clearly articulate in their mind the differences between a Sensing Fe and an iNtuitive Fe? I believe everyone is in agreement on how S and N affect Thinking functions. It is reasoned to accept they have they have a parallel effect on Feeling functions. This is important to define or there will be continued confusion across the board./edit

 

[Eve]

And they also are so willing and able to make those large sacrifices. It's so easy for them to lose or ignore themselves in the equation of what must be done.

Just dealing with Rose... whew. I am constantly telling her that she needs to consider what is best for everyone concerned, not just the people with a need, and especially be concerned about what is best for herself instead of constantly ignore her own needs; but when she sees someone with a need that Fe is telling her must be met, you can rest assured that she will be dead before she stops trying to meet the need. It's a wonderful gift... and a terrible curse all at once.

Yes, SFJs especially will overextend themselves until they get physically sick. I do consider that a gift and a curse at the same time as well.

For someone important to me, I am there and I do ask what can I do to help you. My Fi best friend was the most comfort to me when my Dad passed away. She was just there for me in a quiet and helpful way, without intruding on my grief in the process. The Fe's in my in-law family seemed to NEED so much validation that they were helpful, had the right answers (they didn't) and that I valued their support that I began to avoid them. Having said that, I admit these particular Fe people are extremely underdeveloped.

The two Fe in my family created serious friction between me and my strong T sister and the other Fi sister under the guise of "helping" us to express sympathy to each other. Friction that none of us had the resources to deal with at the time and then the Fe was wanting their validation at being such a wonderful, helpful person and pushing and pushing and pushing and eventually got a verbal corrective from each of us to just back off it, at which time they broke down and wailed that no one appreciated them. They created so much more emotional havoc than the situation called for.

I have two Fe in-laws as well . After years, I tried a new approach that seems to be working. Invited in-law to a 'get together' and explained that although I knew she was trying to help, whenever she meddled in my life and in my house, I didn't take that as help, but as an intrusion on my space. Her actions were being received very differently from her original intention. We would get along much better if she backed off and let me deal with my issues. I also remembered to thank her for all the time she spent helping me (which she truly did, but she didn't know when to stop). Hope that helps. I never thought that would work, but it is working! I needed to make clear where my bondaries were and be more assertive (not agressive) when protecting them.

An Fi would probably take more comfort and benefit from another Fi to whom they were close to. Thinkers can also provide help and comfort in ways that can be very stabilizing at such an emotional time. Of course I imagine a non-neurotic Fe would be very good too, I just have never had the benefit of being close to one.

Yeah, you probably didn't experience a balanced Fe.

 

[ygolo]

I know I posted something to MBTI Nebulous (perhaps my 1st post) that was a critisism of Fe. (I think I already appologized for being a bit insensitive on that forum.)

Please, do keep in mind, that there is nothing aimed at you personally. The fact that you have stayed as calm as you have indicates to me that your Fe has a good "crew" working for her and is acting as a good leader.

According to a book I have by Linda V. Berens:
Introverted functions deal with universals (or try to) while..
Extraverted functions deal with "here and now" particulars.

In that sense, I think Extraverted functions are more "fickle".
To see the pattern, look at Se vs. Si, Ne vs. Ni, Te vs. Ti. Then, if you agree with the pattern, ask yourself why would Fe vs. Fi be different?

My own personal reason for distrust/critisism is:

I percive that outside smaller counter-culture circles (like this forum, I suppose) Fe's dictate the conversations and controll the communication channels, and therefore have a great deal of power. That power, like all forms of power, can corrupt (and often does). Consider the reaction you see, a rebellion--against what is often times (not always) a tyrannical domination of communication channels and standards. Even very young girls have demonstrated the ability and propensity to weild the power of social exlusion to keep her "crown".

This is way to abstract and speculative for my usual taste (hours of writing code, can make me that way), but it is as concise as I could state my reason. If you really want to understand where the rebelious attitude comes from, please look for examples that could be contrued as tyrannical from your Fe friends (or if you can stomach it, yourself).

Note: Just because something is percieved in some way, doesn't make the perception true. However, it is still true that perception was real.

I will provide a comparison between what I consider "Good Fe" and "Bad Fe" behaviour. Not also, I think it is actually more common for "Bad Fe" to show up in adults as group reactions by people who have Fe as terciary or inferior functions. But I Fe's who have let their dominant function exclusively run their life are expert tyrants.

Good Fe:
Keeps broad and flexible rules that actually allow everyone(ideally) to feel included without loosing their individuality.

Bad Fe:
Keep rigid rules to keep their "clique" together, and will attack those that threaten either the rules or the clique (from inside or outside the clique).

Good Fe:
Cares for and nurtures their friends, family, and others in their lives as individuals.

Bad Fe:
"Cares for" and "nurtures" with a "one size fits all" strategy and is resentful of people who don't accept their "nurturing".

Good Fe:
Expresses genuine concern for others, while demphasising their "concern".

Bad Fe:
Expresses "genuine" concern for others, while emphasising their "concern".

Sorry, I am having a hard time being clear (I'm still thinking in C++). Hopefully, some of what I said makes sense. Please, ask questions to clarify.

 

[heart]

The converse of that is some people believe that if many people agree that something is true, the more people believe it, the less truth it has because truth is some sort of untouchable esoteric blob existing in the outer reaches of the universe that only a limited gifted few have access to. The truth can't possibly be that simple, they think, when it really is. So simple that even children can grasp it.

The important point that Jung makes in the whole book is that the chances are greater in our culture for individuals to NOT have developed their own inner selves and faced their own shadows that when we get together in groups, we tend to work towards the most base aspect of the individuals in that group, BUT the base aspect has greater power and effect because it is a group of underdeveloped individuals, not just one underdeveloped individual.

Until a greater number of people put their primary emphasis on developing their own inner self and stop this denigration of self as selfish or dangerous, we will continue to be more often dangerous in groups than not.

It is not an esoteric blob at all, but really a tangile result of a mass number of underdeveloped people (the kind most common in our culture) who join their underdeveloped nature together and though group hysteria and support, can multiply that underdeveloped nature to greater proportions than alone.

...It is, unfortunately, only too clear that if the individual is not truly regenerated in spirit, society cannot be either, for society is the sum total of individuals in need of redemption. I can therefore see it only as a delusion when the Churches try as they apparently do to rope the individual into a social organization and reduce him to a condition of diminished responsibility, instead of raising him out of the torpid, mindless mass and making clear to him that he is the one important factor and that the salvation of the world consists in the salvation of the individual soul."



It is true that mass meetings parade such ideas before him and seek to impress them on him by dint of mass suggestion, with the unedifying result that when the intoxication has worn off, the mass man promptly succumbs to another even more obvious and still louder slogan...

The Undiscovered Self, By Carl Jung p. 59.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

The important point that Jung makes in the whole book is that the chances are greater in our culture for individuals to NOT have developed their own inner selves and faced their own shadows that when we get together in groups, we tend to work towards the most base aspect of the individuals in that group, BUT the base aspect has greater power and effect because it is a group of underdeveloped individuals, not just one underdeveloped individual.

That's a good point.

I percive that outside smaller counter-culture circles (like this forum, I suppose) Fe's dictate the conversations and controll the communication channels, and therefore have a great deal of power. That power, like all forms of power, can corrupt (and often does). Consider the reaction you see, a rebellion--against what is often times (not always) a tyrannical domination of communication channels and standards. Even very young girls have demonstrated the ability and propensity to weild the power of social exlusion to keep her "crown"..

I also especially appreciated reading ygolo's post. Well thought out. One comment about this point in particular. Having been raised the youngest, also Fe, in a beautiful, loving, somewhat anxious family of strong Fi's, I was shaped by subconsioucly submitting my desires to fit into their frameworks. I love and admire them, but since being married to a completely non controlling, non intrusive INTP for a number of years now, i notice the contrast in expectations of me. I have to avoid certain topics of religion and philosophy or be guilty of causing them significant pain. Growing up their emotional pain and self esteem issues resulted in my being expected to hide any aspect of myself that would conflict with that. If i won an award at school, I knew to shut up about it or be guilty of causing them to question their self esteem. I was generally seen as the strongest, the one who could most easily adapt and bend to create the peace and such. (edit: btw this assumption was spot on and produced the best overall results. My siblings self concept was being carved into stone in a way mine wasn't. Of everyone in my family i had the best eventual chance of recovery without extra support and this assumption is proving accurate. /edit)I did, more than i ever could have realized at the time. Everyone in my family has suffered, and they are all beautifully compassionate people. None of them internalized the suffering in the way that i did. None of them took it out on themselves the way that i did. Emotions have largely been my enemy, threatening to destroy me. I am rather experienced as regulating and subjugating my emotions to my environment and to the needs of others. I am conditioned for this. From my experience Fe has provided me with little to no power whatsoever. This occurred in an almost ideal context of being surrounded by kind Fi. This is one person's experience. It may not be representative, but statistically speaking, if it happened once, it has happened elsewhere.

Here's a question regarding Fi and Fe. Someone with well developed Fi has a strong sense of their inner self. No question about that. My sense of 'self' is not an emotional concept at all. I think my 'self' is related directly to my iNtuition, Ni, and to a lesser extent Ti. I'm more protective of my ability to think rationally than of my internal emotions. I see emotions as fleeting, as similar to physical sensations of sickness and pleasure. They are like the weather gradually carving and restructuring the bedrock and cliffs of the internal terrain. Emotions happen to me, they impact me, but they are not me. I can look at them like external objects even when experiencing the emotion. They intrigue me like mysterious complex puzzles that are enlightening to solve. I can completely disregard my emotions if the situation requires it. I also have some measure of distrust in emotion because in extremes it does block thinking. I embrace emotion for their experience and meaning, but keep them at arms length in case they blur one's ability to perceive clearly and have a coherent understanding. Also, a sense of self based on Ni (if i'm interpreting this correctly) thinks about self in relationship to a kind of universal meaning. Self is best known when the boundaries between it and the vast expanse of the unknown are most dissolved. I best know who i am when looking into the night sky, becoming a speck of dust in the context of everything. I am my capacity to connect with what is beyond me - if that makes any sense before drinking morning coffee.

Can the sense of self be as clear and complete whether it is Fi Ni Si or Ti? I tend to think it can.

 

[runvardh]

I agree wholeheartedly. My wife and I are both INFPs. When we clash with each other over something and feel strongly about our positions, it can be a real struggle and a painful sacrifice for either one of us to back down and let go of the issue. And if neither of us can let go, then the atmosphere usually gets pretty poisonous.

One of the best ways we can quickly unwind these kinds of conflicts is to point out instances in the past when the shoe was on the other foot and we were dealing with the same issues from the other sides. (After 7 1/2 years together, such instances can usually be found.) And then it's easy to unwind the conflict once we realize how interchangeable the positions are.

Sounds like when my father and I butt heads only he's more immune to reason so I end up having to give in before things get really stupid...

 

[runvardh]

Toonia, growing up in a house of Fi... I feel sorry for you

 

[Eve]

I also especially appreciated reading ygolo's post. Well thought out. One comment about this point in particular. Having been raised the youngest, also Fe, in a beautiful, loving, somewhat anxious family of strong Fi's, I was shaped by subconsioucly submitting my desires to fit into their frameworks. I love and admire them, but since being married to a completely non controlling, non intrusive INTP for a number of years now, i notice the contrast in expectations of me. I have to avoid certain topics of religion and philosophy or be guilty of causing them significant pain. Growing up their emotional pain and self esteem issues resulted in my being expected to hide any aspect of myself that would conflict with that. If i won an award at school, I knew to shut up about it or be guilty of causing them to question their self esteem. I was generally seen as the strongest, the one who could most easily adapt and bend to create the peace and such. (edit: btw this assumption was spot on and produced the best overall results. My siblings self concept was being carved into stone in a way mine wasn't. Of everyone in my family i had the best eventual chance of recovery without extra support and this assumption is proving accurate. /edit)I did, more than i ever could have realized at the time. Everyone in my family has suffered, and they are all beautifully compassionate people. None of them internalized the suffering in the way that i did. None of them took it out on themselves the way that i did. Emotions have largely been my enemy, threatening to destroy me. I am rather experienced as regulating and subjugating my emotions to my environment and to the needs of others. I am conditioned for this. From my experience Fe has provided me with little to no power whatsoever. This occurred in an almost ideal context of being surrounded by kind Fi. This is one person's experience. It may not be representative, but statistically speaking, if it happened once, it has happened elsewhere.

My mom is Fi as well Toonia, however that had a good impact on me (for obvious reasons). I'm not sure I understood you correctly, you're saying that because your family was self-doubting and seemed fragile it caused you to hide your achivements. Was that an explicit parental expectation? or your parents identified more with your sibilings and kind of gave you implicit cues that was not ok to do that?