[MBTI General] Opposites attract?

[Jack Flak]

This is one of those analogies that look pretty but don't really work as well in real life.
~ a definite introvert with a very strong preference for other introverts and a marked distaste for extroverts.

As usual, I've allowed for exceptions with "This is how I see the most common dynamic."

I do know introverts who don't want to engage extroverts, as these introverts highly prioritize their independence.

It may or may not have a loose correlation with enneagram variants, such that a self-preservation variant values independence more than intimacy, and vice versa for the sexual variant.

 

[INA]

gross

 

[Jack Flak]

lol 'k

 

[Lady_X]

gross

hey shut up chica i was kidding!!

 

[INA]

don't come any closer. I'm not sexual like Flak.

 

[Spartacuss]

As usual, I've allowed for exceptions with "This is how I see the most common dynamic."

I do know introverts who don't want to engage extroverts, as these introverts highly prioritize their independence.

That's the thing though: I don't see that this is the most common dynamic in real life, actually. Certainly, one partner is often more intro/extroverted than the other, but not necessarily an intro/extrovert. Seems to me that introverts not uncommonly prefer the habits and pace of other introverts, while many extroverts thrive off the kind of stimulation other extroverts give. I have not, however, read any studies on the matter if pairing up by intro/extroversion, so who knows. I welcome anything you have on that score.

 

[Jack Flak]

That's the thing though: I don't see that this is the most common dynamic in real life, actually. Certainly, one partner is often more intro/extroverted than the other, but not necessarily an intro/extrovert. Seems to me that introverts not uncommonly prefer the habits and pace of other introverts, while many extroverts thrive off the kind of stimulation other extroverts give. I have not, however, read any studies on the matter if pairing up by intro/extroversion, so who knows. I welcome anything you have on that score.

I doubt there are any statistics available, and I don't think they would be relevant anyway.

I even consider it likely that E-E and I-I relationships are more common. But it is the nature of the dynamics which I concern myself with.

 

[Spartacuss]

I doubt there are any statistics available, and I don't think they would be relevant anyway.

I even consider it likely that E-E and I-I relationships are more common. But it is the nature of the dynamics which I concern myself with.

Oh, so it's not what the introverts and extroverts actually choose for relationships but rather how the relationships work.

So by this:

Introverts' psyches are are O shaped, and extroverts' are C shaped.
OO results in, as you can see, two separate units which may exist comfortably together, but do not fully engage.
CC (flip the second C around) results in each unit attempting to engage the other simultaneously, resulting in interference.
CO results in a solid fit, with O being peacefully engaged by C.

What do you mean by a solid fit? Do you mean that it is somehow a more optimal fit for both?
How do you get to the most common dynamic being that the O is peacefully engaged by C (rather than being irritated)? Do you mean only theoretically (in your conception) with letter shape C and O or actually in the world with real people?

 

[ptgatsby]

That's the thing though: I don't see that this is the most common dynamic in real life, actually.

I think the main reason for this is a flaw in how the coupling example works. Two Is are as likely to couple as an E-I, if not more so, due to the tendency of only sharing things with those close to them. Not all Is will be able to share everything, but the vast majority would consider their mates to be close enough.

I don't see much evidence of opposites attracting, even on the I/E dimension. The most I can say is that, Es seem to just more 'attractive'. Positive energy normally is.

(Personally, I hate it except in small doses, but I'm on the "socially anxious" side of the I/E divide.)

 

[Jack Flak]

What do you mean by a solid fit? Do you mean that it is somehow a more optimal fit for both?

That's my position.

How do you get to the most common dynamic being that the O is peacefully engaged by C (rather than being irritated)? Do you mean only theoretically (in your conception) with letter shape C and O or actually in the world with real people?

It isn't so much a theory as an analogy, based on what I've noticed. I see E-E relationships in which there's just too much going on, in my opinion. Two talkers and no listeners.

I see I-I relationships which are boring. Two listeners and no talkers.

I see I-E relationships which seem just right, because one person talks and the other one listens.

Again, there's more to people and relationships than introversion and extroversion, but with these traits isolated, these are my views.

 

[Domino]

This debate could be solved by a simple game of Slaps.

 

[Spartacuss]

That's my position.


It isn't so much a theory as an analogy, based on what I've noticed. I see E-E relationships in which there's just too much going on, in my opinion. Two talkers and no listeners.

I see I-I relationships which are boring. Two listeners and no talkers.

I see I-E relationships which seem just right, because one person talks and the other one listens.

Again, there's more to people and relationships than introversion and extroversion, but with these traits isolated, these are my views.

I think this is pure idealism or love of forms. I don't think that you can reduce intro/extroversion to talkativeness, but rather on source of energy and how one understands world (internal v. external principles). If we are admitting observations, I'd say that it's my experience that extroverted loved ones don't necessarily talk your ears off anymore than introverts. It is context-dependent. While introverts may not be all that communicative with everybody, we can be quite talkative and gregarious with loved ones - the context of a one-on-one partnering relationship.

Also, introversion and extroversion are on a spectrum, so the analogy would be more robust if you meant relative intro/extroversion.

It is true that if both are preoccupied with their inner-worlds to the exclusion of the other, there's not a lot of engagement going on. However, it's also true that introverts may feel more comfortable sharing their perhaps similar inner worlds with other introverts and loathe that which disturbs it, which in some cases is another's extroversion.

Further, if we are to borrow your conception of the staid introvert and exciting extrovert, what you may consider boring other introverts would find more intriguing and what you consider "exciting" in the extrovert, introverts may find gadabout silliness. But i wouldn't say that's necessarily the case, because I haven't found a "stimulating/boring" mapping to "introversion/extroversion."

This debate could be solved by a simple game of Slaps.

Come again?
Not really a debate - I don't know that I can say it does or doesn't work. Trying to get at what Mr. Flak means and why.

 

[cascadeco]

That's the thing though: I don't see that this is the most common dynamic in real life, actually. Certainly, one partner is often more intro/extroverted than the other, but not necessarily an intro/extrovert. Seems to me that introverts not uncommonly prefer the habits and pace of other introverts, while many extroverts thrive off the kind of stimulation other extroverts give. I have not, however, read any studies on the matter if pairing up by intro/extroversion, so who knows. I welcome anything you have on that score.

I think I/I is quite common - probably at least as common as E/I. I wouldn't think E/E would be as common - am only aware of one E/E couple in real life.

Highly subjective, of course. I know some I's who have a definite preference for other I's for some of the same reasons already listed, and they seem to do fine. But I think they also have a different 'goal', if you will, of what they want their relationship to be like, and what they desire out of it.

On the other hand, having grown up in a family of all I's, there's a negative side to that dynamic (+'s and -'s to everything, obviously), and I guess personally I desire a bit of extroversion thrown into the mix.

 

[LostInNerSpace]

I find extraverted feelers intoxicating, women at least. They melt my icy intp heart, and then some. I think it's interesting to note how feelers often decribe thinkers as "interesting".

 

[Domino]

Come again?
Not really a debate - I don't know that I can say it does or doesn't work. Trying to get at what Mr. Flak means and why.

Just a little joke. :hi:

 

[King sns]

I find extraverted feelers intoxicating, women at least. They melt my icy intp heart, and then some. I think it's interesting to note how feelers often decribe thinkers as "interesting".

ooh. thinkers...

 

[King sns]

aww.

 

[Spartacuss]

Just a little joke. :hi:

Shall we slap it out?

 

[Desperado44]

I've been thinking about introversion and extraversion, and the interaction between people who are I's and E's. I'm sorry if there's already a thread that deals with this subject, I tried to go back but none caught my eye

I know introverts may well enjoy the company of extraverts, (although worthy of an acknowledgement that in large doses it may be draining), but do extraverts enjoy introverts company? As in, would an extravert seek out the company of an introvert to another extravert? To stereotype even more, if introverts are seen as "shy" in group situations and extraverts as "outgoing". What in introverts might interest extraverts?

In general, do you tend to get intrigued (regardless of you introversion or extraversion) in outgoing people rather than less outgoing individuals? What are the best aspects an extravert and an introvert can offer you?

I know I put this in an extremely simple form, and of course I don't expect it to be that way in reality, but it's just one of the things I've been thinking. I'm really interested in what you guys think about this, so your thoughts on the subject are very welcomed

This one is easy for me:

I am immensely attracted to "I's".....I always have been from teenage years up...

For a long time, I didn't understand why.....but if I met a group of girls or entered a room with many women....I would instantly gravitate towards an "I".....

Why? I find their quiet demeanor sexy and intriguing. I think they are the best at communicating without a word. I have an aversion for loud women....I think "I's" tend to have a 'femininity' about them....they seem soft, tender...very female.

They also seem to be more open to affection....to quiet time together....as Snow Patrol puts it "to just lie there and forget the world"...

I don't know if that explains it.....but I seem to be attracted long term to "I's"......so yes, I believe opposites do attract.

 

[Lauren Ashley]

I'm attracted to ENFs. I would say my attraction to Es vs Is is pretty close to equal, it just depends on the person.