[MBTI General] Mind Games for Attraction?

[Thalassa]

Yeah, that makes sense. As a whole I feel painful uneasiness about roles that are forced upon me by outward pressure.

This is a very INFP thing to say - I'm not being sarcastic or negative or anything either, I really mean it. It's interesting to me how much your responses (and Curator's, actually) seem INFP to me.

Authenticity is paramount.

I have encountered this disagreement with other INFPs in the past - them not understanding why I would concede to any kind of external role, expectation, or want a lot of input from other people.

Just an observation.

 

[Giggly]

People dont always ask with words, they make their interest known, I make mine known, and the sharing commences... even the most open people are often nervous about sharing till they are sure the other is interested in learning, its not a game to test the waters be4 jumping in.

Oh. Well I'm out of my league now. I'm the person who has trouble telling the difference between friendliness and subtle romantic interest.

 

[Curator]

This is a very INFP thing to say - I'm not being sarcastic or negative or anything either, I really mean it. It's interesting to me how much your responses (and Curator's, actually) seem INFP to me.

Authenticity is paramount.

I have encountered this disagreement with other INFPs in the past - them not understanding why I would concede to any kind of external role, expectation, or want a lot of input from other people.

Just an observation.

I used to be the same way when I was a teenager though, then I recognized that I was not getting the closeness I wanted with people, that sure I had literally hundreds of "friends" (at least half of those romantic interests) but none of them really knew me, and I didnt really know most of them, it takes a huge amount of effort for me to force myself to be completely genuine with others, but ive found I actually get the results I want the MOST this way, I get to learn about what makes them tick, they get to learn about what makes me tick, my intense curiosity about other humans gets sated, and I get close loving friendships with every benefit of a romantic one except actual sexual intercourse, which isnt an issue for me, that has more to do with me specifically than type I believe though.

Edit: and what I really enjoy about it is the level of understanding developed, its very emotionally satisfying for me.

 

[Curator]

yeah.

though i still am not convinced that the example in the OP is actually a good example of playing mind games, at least not the eeeevil kind we're talking about. calling the shots doesn't necessarily mean controlling the other person. the way i'm reading it, it sounds more like taking charge of yourself instead of allowing yourself to revolve around a love interest. it's more like a mind game with yourself, if anything! the parts that sound like they edge on disingenuousness are "showing" your life and "acting like the boss". it still sounds like she means the boss of yourself more than the boss of the couple. i would not mind someone interested in me adopting this strategy, as long as they don't plan to boss me around - in which case i'd be giving them the boot anyway.

though perhaps that is a matter of interpretation.

It must be a matter of interpretation, but considering basically TG and marmie both interpreted it the same as I have, and are in favor of it... or at least seem to be from what they have said, that is the type im addressing in my further posting... controlling ones self really does not sound at all what the OP was meant as... and considering almost everyone ive ever known seems to play control games, using that exact same kind of stuff to try and control the other person in the relationship... I think that may be the more likely interpretation, since its also the most common behavior within society...

 

[Thalassa]

I used to be the same way when I was a teenager though, then I recognized that I was not getting the closeness I wanted with people, that sure I had literally hundreds of "friends" (at least half of those romantic interests) but none of them really knew me, and I didnt really know most of them, it takes a huge amount of effort for me to force myself to be completely genuine with others, but ive found I actually get the results I want the MOST this way, I get to learn about what makes them tick, they get to learn about what makes me tick, my intense curiosity about other humans gets sated, and I get close loving friendships with every benefit of a romantic one except actual sexual intercourse, which isnt an issue for me, that has more to do with me specifically than type I believe though.

I'm able to have close relationships with people I even play these little games with, they can even be a bonding experience. I don't play hardcore games with people I truly love - and that's the point I keep trying to make here - I wouldn't even call it "mindgames" so much as relationship management and provoking or maintaining sexual interest.

I don't view conceding to roles or other people's opinions as necessarily sacrificing my authenticity or honesty, because if it's a role I'm not comfortable playing, I won't keep doing it.

I don't think you really are truly close to someone unless you have BOTH a friendship and psychological/emotional intimacy PLUS sex. That is my experience. I was closer to my ESFJ ex than anyone, he very much saw the real me. I would say I can only be this level of being myself within some kind of romantic context - like fully being vulnerable.

I don't think any relationship surpasses the intimacy of a sort of husband/wife relationship (even if they aren't legally married, and even if it's two men or two women).

But maybe that's who I was put here to be. My cousin once said she'd rather have children without a husband if she had to choose, I said I'd rather have a husband without children.

Perhaps you find your greatest closeness in platonic friendships, I do not know.

 

[skylights]

This is a very INFP thing to say - I'm not being sarcastic or negative or anything either, I really mean it. It's interesting to me how much your responses (and Curator's, actually) seem INFP to me.

Authenticity is paramount.

I have encountered this disagreement with other INFPs in the past - them not understanding why I would concede to any kind of external role, expectation, or want a lot of input from other people.

Just an observation.

yes, i felt the same thing, hence my remark about our openness to roles.

perhaps it has to do with E, or our enneagram types or instincts, or just other individual personality differences, but i fall to the side of being very interpersonally adaptable. i can easily see myself being more social, or more socially aware, or more confident, or any other adaptation to fit another person, because i am doing that all the time to associate with people in general, as well as just by myself for fun, to meet my own feelings. similarly, i try to meet people in the middle, and i consider adapting myself to be a useful part of that. i do not feel like i lose myself when i do this.

so if a certain trait or behavior is more likely to make a crush of mine willing to consider me as a partner... then i am usually very open to it, provided it doesn't clash majorly with my personality. there are some things i cannot be - authoritative, fastidious, aggressive. but there are so many others. i don't even do it consciously most of the time, i don't think. i can say with certitude that it has been useful in my close relationships, though. in several cases i can think of how adapting to the other person has made me better, because my desire to be appealing to them causes me to push myself harder. i tend to go for ambitious types... so i usually have to step up my game

 

[Curator]

I don't think you really are truly close to someone unless you have BOTH a friendship and psychological/emotional intimacy PLUS sex. That is my experience. I was closer to my ESFJ ex than anyone, he very much saw the real me. I would say I can only be this level of being myself within some kind of romantic context - like fully being vulnerable.

I don't think any relationship surpasses the intimacy of a sort of husband/wife relationship (even if they aren't legally married, and even if it's two men or two women).

But maybe that's who I was put here to be. My cousin once said she'd rather have children without a husband if she had to choose, I said I'd rather have a husband without children.

Perhaps you find your greatest closeness in platonic friendships, I do not know.

I have to say, that more often than not, ive seen more emotional intimacy and open-ness within friendships (not just my own, but other peoples as well) especially between women, then I see in in their romantic relationships... and for me personally, ive found this also to be true, but I believe this to be the case because people who believe sex creates a greater intimacy, but have no intention of having sex with me, are more likely to be more open with me, because the intimacy they consider sex to create (which I believe it can) is scary for them, so in the end they end up more open with me because they expect only sex to create that level of intimacy, so its like this platonic intimacy sneaks up on them or something and they dont know its coming till its there,lol... I cant even count how many of my female friends consider themselves closer to me emotionally than they do their SO's... (every one of them but 2, who interestingly, didnt play control games.)

That being said, I think if I could find this intimacy, with some one whom we both actually want to be together sexually, forever, I believe that making love would definitely increase our intimacy... Im just saying that sex often does not = Ultimate intimacy...in fact, it seems not to most of the time for most people ive ever known.

 

[Curator]

yes, i felt the same thing, hence my remark about our openness to roles.

perhaps it has to do with E, or our enneagram types or instincts, or just other individual personality differences, but i fall to the side of being very interpersonally adaptable. i can easily see myself being more social, or more socially aware, or more confident, or any other adaptation to fit another person, because i am doing that all the time to associate with people in general, as well as just by myself for fun, to meet my own feelings. similarly, i try to meet people in the middle, and i consider adapting myself to be a useful part of that. i do not feel like i lose myself when i do this.

so if a certain trait or behavior is more likely to make a crush of mine willing to consider me as a partner... then i am usually very open to it, provided it doesn't clash majorly with my personality. there are some things i cannot be - authoritative, fastidious, aggressive. but there are so many others. i don't even do it consciously most of the time, i don't think. i can say with certitude that it has been useful in my close relationships, though. in several cases i can think of how adapting to the other person has made me better, because my desire to be appealing to them causes me to push myself harder. i tend to go for ambitious types... so i usually have to step up my game

hmmm, there seems to be another misunderstanding... I am not saying there is anything wrong with being open to what other people are interested in or want, im a e9, heck I used to go way to far on that, literally at risk of losing myself when I was younger,lol... but situations like "this person i really care about loves dancing! im going to learn how to dance!" is extremely different from "this person I really want loves dancing! im going to pretend im an expert!" there is obviously a major distinction there, there is a difference between being open to learning new things, changing and growing, vs pretending to be somebody else to get with them...

 

[Thalassa]

hmmm, there seems to be another misunderstanding... I am not saying there is anything wrong with being open to what other people are interested in or want, im a e9, heck I used to go way to far on that, literally at risk of losing myself when I was younger,lol... but situations like "this person i really care about loves dancing! im going to learn how to dance!" is extremely different from "this person I really want loves dancing! im going to pretend im an expert!" there is obviously a major distinction there, there is a difference between being open to learning new things, changing and growing, vs pretending to be somebody else to get with them...

Oh there's no pretending to be somebody. I think you've misunderstood.

 

[Giggly]

Fascinating.

 

[Curator]

Oh there's no pretending to be somebody. I think you've misunderstood.

Maybe, but that is what it has sounded like though from your posts, pretending to be something one is not, to gain control in a relationship, that is much different than showing interest in things somebody you care about is interested in, I will even go so far myself as to tell them "Ive not been interested in this be4, but Im really curious to learn about why you are so passionate about this, so I wanna give it a a try.

 

[Thalassa]

Maybe, but that is what it has sounded like though from your posts, pretending to be something one is not, to gain control in a relationship, that is much different than showing interest in things somebody you care about is interested in, I will even go so far myself as to tell them "Ive not been interested in this be4, but Im really curious to learn about why you are so passionate about this, so I wanna give it a a try.

Yes well to you it might be pretending, to me it isn't.

You really strike me as an INFP.

 

[skylights]

hmmm, there seems to be another misunderstanding... I am not saying there is anything wrong with being open to what other people are interested in or want, im a e9, heck I used to go way to far on that, literally at risk of losing myself when I was younger,lol... but situations like "this person i really care about loves dancing! im going to learn how to dance!" is extremely different from "this person I really want loves dancing! im going to pretend im an expert!" there is obviously a major distinction there, there is a difference between being open to learning new things, changing and growing, vs pretending to be somebody else to get with them...

mm, yes, i considered e9 for a while because of that idea of "losing oneself" with another person, because i adapt a good deal. later when i discovered the instinctual stackings i realized it was an effect of sx, being that e9 does not really fit me.

i suppose i have toed this line before - of learning someone is interested in ______, then reading up on _____ so that i can converse with them fluidly should it become pertinent. i would not tell them that i learned about it just for them. but i would not lie about my expertise, that only creates embarrassment later. beginning, i am quite picky about what i choose to share, and how i choose to share it.

I have to say, that more often than not, ive seen more emotional intimacy and open-ness within friendships (not just my own, but other peoples as well) especially between women, then I see in in their romantic relationships...

i have found this as well at times. i think the lack of sex even being on the table as a possibility can create a vacuum for greater emotional depth and trust. sex can be a puzzle piece or a distraction, depending.

 

[Curator]

Yes well to you it might be pretending, to me it isn't.

You really strike me as an INFP.

lol, I dont particularly get why anything ive said is INFP, considering ones type is based on cognitive functions, not opinions, for instance, I consider the orderliness of the average INTJ to be amazing, and have worked to try to incorporate such into my life, that does not make me an INTJ... Caring about having a more than surface level relationship, does not make me an INFP either... Although its perfectly possible, I just consider it unlikely at this point given other evidence (put forth in my type me thread)

 

[Thalassa]

I have to say, that more often than not, ive seen more emotional intimacy and open-ness within friendships (not just my own, but other peoples as well) especially between women, then I see in in their romantic relationships... and for me personally, ive found this also to be true, but I believe this to be the case because people who believe sex creates a greater intimacy, but have no intention of having sex with me, are more likely to be more open with me, because the intimacy they consider sex to create (which I believe it can) is scary for them, so in the end they end up more open with me because they expect only sex to create that level of intimacy, so its like this platonic intimacy sneaks up on them or something and they dont know its coming till its there,lol... I cant even count how many of my female friends consider themselves closer to me emotionally than they do their SO's... (every one of them but 2, who interestingly, didnt play control games.)

That being said, I think if I could find this intimacy, with some one whom we both actually want to be together sexually, forever, I believe that making love would definitely increase our intimacy... Im just saying that sex often does not = Ultimate intimacy...in fact, it seems not to most of the time for most people ive ever known.

I wonder if you're very young, because this reminds me of when I was in my late teens/early twenties and sex and intimate love were still somewhat divided.

Then I grew out of that. As far as I know, people are supposed to.

If you think you'll be closer to your platonic female friends than someone they have a real, adult relationship with, I think you have another thing coming.

No offense.

 

[Thalassa]

lol, I dont particularly get why anything ive said is INFP, considering ones type is based on cognitive functions, not opinions, for instance, I consider the orderliness of the average INTJ to be amazing, and have worked to try to incorporate such into my life, that does not make me an INTJ... Caring about having a more than surface level relationship, does not make me an INFP either... Although its perfectly possible, I just consider it unlikely at this point given other evidence (put forth in my type me thread)

I don't have surface level relationships. To me it just sounds like you're justifying being friend zoned, and you don't even understand what I or skylights am talking about.

I think you are INFP for other reasons that what I've seen in this thread, but I just voiced it now, because I felt sure. I won't bring it up any longer if it bothers you.

 

[Curator]

mm, yes, i considered e9 for a while because of that idea of "losing oneself" with another person, because i adapt a good deal. later when i discovered the instinctual stackings i realized it was an effect of sx, being that e9 does not really fit me.

e9 is about the only one that actually fits me, and it seems to do so like a glove, especially the levels...im SO I believe, if I remember right...

i suppose i have toed this line before - of learning someone is interested in ______, then reading up on _____ so that i can converse with them fluidly should it become pertinent. i would not tell them that i learned about it just for them. but i would not lie about my expertise, that only creates embarrassment later. beginning, i am quite picky about what i choose to share, and how i choose to share it.

I dont always tell them "im learning this cause you like it" that tends to happen once they already know its something im not normally interested in, otherwise I basically do what you do... Also, I dont share everything at once, I have to feel comfortable with a person, but I never feel comfortable with people who plays games...its been my experience, the more games they play, the more negative their intentions, so with those I can wait a LONG time to open up...[/QUOTE]

i have found this as well at times. i think the lack of sex even being on the table as a possibility can create a vacuum for greater emotional depth and trust. sex can be a puzzle piece or a distraction, depending.

I think thats pretty accurate from what ive witnessed, its like it can distract from getting closer, its also why I believe bonds can be easier to develop over the internet often(at least for me), because there isnt that physical response muddying up the waters...

 

[Giggly]

I'd like to add to the OP mind games....

Rule no. 3: Break up with him before he breaks up with you.
Whoever breaks up with the person first...... wins.

 

[Thalassa]

I'd like to add to the OP mind games....

Rule no. 3: Break up with him before he breaks up with you.
Whoever breaks up with the person first...... wins.

Also, whomever creeps out the creepy guy wins. Wait...wrong thread...maybe.

 

[skylights]

e9 is about the only one that actually fits me, and it seems to do so like a glove, especially the levels...im SO I believe, if I remember right...

yay for you for figuring a good type match out! i am still working on mine...

I never feel comfortable with people who plays games...its been my experience, the more games they play, the more negative their intentions, so with those I can wait a LONG time to open up...

yes, me too. it's fairly easy to tell when someone is being intentionally deceptive. i once had a guy try to go out with me because he really wanted to go out with a friend of mine. i let him treat me to lunch and over lunch discussed how he should go about approaching her


fwiw, curator, i do understand what marmalade is talking about. not to isolate you or anything, by any means hug - but i think what she, and i as well, see is you're relating more with a relational touchpoint of genuineness / authenticity / sincerity / "truth" where we are relating with a more multifaceted / fluid kaleidoscope identity sort of thing. Fi and Ne, in some ways.

but you yourself note you're eNFP, implying more Fi than the average ENFP, so that would make sense.