Video: INFJ Door Slam

[GIjade]

That's helpful.

One of the things that is bothering me in all these descriptions though is that there is an implicit blaming of all the relationship problems on the other person. It's as if the INFJ is saying I've done everything I could and am just not being treated the way that I should (whatever way that supposedly is which presumably is unique to them as an individual). Relationships are always a two way street and it's rare for stuff to be all one person's fault. To blame it all on the other person is wrong.

It's not wrong if the other person is totally to blame. It's not always a two way street.

As to "loyalty" - the behavior seems to be the antithesis of that. I have had an INTJ friend since college. Sometimes we don't talk to each other for years at a time. He stays with me thick and thin. I do the same with him. That's loyalty. Bringing someone in really close and then suddenly dumping them on the side of the road because the relationship dynamic is hurting you isn't loyalty. It seems like dis-functional relational behavior due to a failure to set normal or appropriate boundaries and an inability to to deal with conflict in a constructive manner.

You seem to be so naive.

 

[GIjade]

Yes. I agree with you. Failure to discuss and resolve issues isn't fair on the other person, for a start.

And it isn't fair when the other person won't discuss the issues when you try.

 

[GIjade]

I think one reason other types find it odd is that it doesn't happen to us at all. I've never cut off contact with someone who I was close to - not a single time. I have had it done to me a couple of times.

You're either very fortunate or you have no boundaries at all.

 

[GIjade]

There are several reasons for the the "too close" aspect appearing, too many to go over in detail, but I'd say the main one is that there is kind of a naive optimism that is very common in younger INFJs w/r to human nature: the overall assumption that kindness begets kindness, that most people are good, kind and decent, and a willingness to overlook personal flaws (since the INFJ is all too aware of his/her own personal flaws). This severe lack of skepticism about human nature is what allows INFJs to get "too close", at which point the "door slam" is metaphorically ripping the band aid off instead of slowly peeling it off.

Yes, it's really too bad, isn't it, that a child born into this world needs to have it pounded into it's little head that kindness does not beget kindness, most people are bad, mean and indecent, that personal flaws should never be overlooked and that he or she should be severely skeptical when it comes to other people.

 

[Lexicon]

Yes, it's really too bad, isn't it, that a child born into this world needs to have it pounded into it's little head that kindness does not beget kindness, most people are bad, mean and indecent, that personal flaws should never be overlooked and that he or she should be severely skeptical when it comes to other people.

@ the bolded - I must strongly disagree with those statements. I'd still like to believe that most people are not inherently "bad, mean and indecent." Most people, on some level or another, have their baggage. They've got unpacking & growing to do. Hurting others is not their main objective. That said, trying to understand/empathize with a person doesn't mean boundaries should not be set from time to time.

And sure, there are some really damaged/emotionally bankrupt people out there who are capable of causing grievous harm (physical or emotional) without remorse.. but that percentage of the population is markedly smaller, thankfully.

Your posts have a very raw feel to them. Like there's a lot of unresolved pain going on. I don't know you, obviously, so I'm merely speculating (& hopefully this does not offend). Sometimes pain can discolor our overall point of view before we reconcile it. Might be something to consider.

In my experience, people deserve the benefit of the doubt. They deserve compassion, understanding, & communication. Trust, however, is to be earned. In practice, these things will usually uncover any red flags to an observant person over time, & aid in determining if the relationship is healthy to pursue.

Caution is definitely useful, but bitterness is destructive.

 

[GIjade]

@ the bolded - I must strongly disagree with those statements. I'd still like to believe that most people are not inherently "bad, mean and indecent."

I disagree with them as well; I was using the words in the post I was referring to. I personally still think people are inherently good and most are decent. I was just trying to make a point.

Your posts have a very raw feel to them. Like there's a lot of unresolved pain going on. I don't know you, obviously, so I'm merely speculating (& hopefully this does not offend). Sometimes pain can discolor our overall point of view before we reconcile it. Might be something to consider..

Yeah, you're right about that. But until I can discuss my "unresolved pain" with someone, anyone - it will remain unresolved.

In my experience, people deserve the benefit of the doubt. They deserve compassion, understanding, & communication. Trust, however, is to be earned. In practice, these things will usually uncover any red flags to an observant person over time, & aid in determining if the relationship is healthy to pursue.

You're preachin' to the choir here. I have always given people the benefit of the doubt. I have also always been compassionate and understanding, probably more so than the average person.But you see, that's how I got hurt. And it's why I wrote that bit about teaching children not to be too trusting, etc., of other people.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

The INFJ gets to know someone and everything is going fine. THEN they realize, "Holy shit!", there's something really wrong/bad about the person. Or the realize that they're just "too close" and the relationship is "imbalanced". Or the relationship doesn't otherwise meet the INFJ's expectations of what it "should be". (This can make it difficult to nail things down, personality-wise, as "should be" is very different from INFJ to INFJ.)

Seems worth mentioning, because this has been a recurring point in threads when INFJs bring this up- it isn't about there being something wrong/bad about the person. The word "incompatibility" comes up a lot to describe it. There's even a distinct aversion to seeing people as "wrong/bad" because of the idealism. Largely for the reasons Lexicon described- even during adolescence, that's pretty much how I've always seen the hurtful behavior of others.

I think it's actually this pronounced reluctance to see things in a black/white way (good/bad) that makes it so incredibly difficult to know how to say something when a problem surfaces- like, with that relativity, we can't even tell it's a problem until the emotional charge is too strong to deny it. And even then, it can be difficult to understand why something is a problem- we'll only know we need to stop interacting with it, or at least distance it. It's a 'frog in hot water' kind of thing- we don't know something is a problem until it's too late.

There are several reasons for the the "too close" aspect appearing, too many to go over in detail, but I'd say the main one is that there is kind of a naive optimism that is very common in younger INFJs w/r to human nature: the overall assumption that kindness begets kindness, that most people are good, kind and decent, and a willingness to overlook personal flaws (since the INFJ is all too aware of his/her own personal flaws). This severe lack of skepticism about human nature is what allows INFJs to get "too close", at which point the "door slam" is metaphorically ripping the band aid off instead of slowly peeling it off.

I don't relate a lot to the "too close" part of this- even when I was younger, I wouldn't say I let people in too close based on optimism. The only thing that's ever made me feel close to someone was actual repeated experience of them, and a lot of it. As I've written elsewhere in this forum- I think authentic vulnerability requires shared struggle and continuous exposure (from here). I need both of those to feel attunement with someone- there are quite a few people I've had continuous exposure with, but very few people I've shared a sense of similar experience with. It's very possible that it's just me, but it seems to me I've seen this same reticence in other INFJs. I think it's likely the reason behind the notorious INFJ need for privacy.

But I do seem to recall other INFJs here, in the past, explaining that other people feel closer to them than they felt in return. On an almost regular basis. Like, there's a unidirectional sense of attunement going on- and they might not even realize the other person feels the 'attunement' until they can't easily get away from them. Or something. Maybe that's what you're referring to here.

Yes, it's really too bad, isn't it, that a child born into this world needs to have it pounded into it's little head that kindness does not beget kindness, most people are bad, mean and indecent, that personal flaws should never be overlooked and that he or she should be severely skeptical when it comes to other people.

I think that, instead of teaching to be skeptical, it's important to teach kids (probably especially NFs, given our need to believe the best in people) resilience- so that when someone is very cruel, especially when it's someone close to us, there's still always already awareness of the kindness that exists elsewhere in the world.

It's really such an incredibly shitty experience- and there's no way to overstate the shittiness here, it's hell- to have someone come along and decimate our trust in others and humanity. Not nearly enough of us receive the emotional training (during our upbringing) required to be resilient for such things, and it's really difficult to go back in as an adult and cultivate it.

 

[Starry]

I would be interested in NFJ feedback on [MENTION=9310]uumlau[/MENTION]'s comment/statement...

I know I'm dealing with an INFJ is that I figure out very quickly that I need to treat them gently.

^^This doesn't necessarily align with my experience but acknowledge there may in fact be a larger range of expression for Js than there is for Ps. Much is made of the NFP demand for authenticity but I see a "hidden" version of this same thing when it comes to the more personal relationship and the NFJ. I mean, the NFJs I've known often appear to become reactive towards modified and/or humoring behaviour in the exact same way NFPs do but perhaps I'm not seeing things clearly in this regard.

Emotionally complex...yes. Need for special handling?...in my world that suggestion would create a bad day but...?

 

[GIjade]

I think that, instead of teaching to be skeptical, it's important to teach kids (probably especially NFs, given our need to believe the best in people) resilience- so that when someone is very cruel, especially when it's someone close to us, there's still always already awareness of the kindness that exists elsewhere in the world.

It's really such an incredibly shitty experience- and there's no way to overstate the shittiness here, it's hell- to have someone come along and decimate our trust in others and humanity. Not nearly enough of us receive the emotional training (during our upbringing) required to be resilient for such things, and it's really difficult to go back in as an adult and cultivate it.

You know, I agree with your response, but I also think it speaks to the need for a child or an adult in that situation to have a somewhat good sense of intuition and also have the ability to discern between who might be trustworthy and who might not be. I personally don't have either of those, shall we say, qualities, therefore even if given that sort of emotional training in childhood, I still wouldn't have been able to apply it to the real world.

 

[uumlau]

I would be interested in NFJ feedback on [MENTION=9310]uumlau[/MENTION]'s comment/statement...





^^This doesn't necessarily align with my experience but acknowledge there may in fact be a larger range of expression for Js than there is for Ps. Much is made of the NFP demand for authenticity but I see a "hidden" version of this same thing when it comes to the more personal relationship and the NFJ. I mean, the NFJs I've known often appear to become reactive towards modified and/or humoring behaviour in the exact same way NFPs do but perhaps I'm not seeing things clearly in this regard.

Emotionally complex...yes. Need for special handling?...in my world that suggestion would create a bad day but...?

*sigh* Gotta love how people take one word and run with it.

Short version: *I* have to treat them *gently*. Me, not you. Gently, not "special handling". Geez ...

To put it in context, each type, to me, has a certain "vibe", and that's how I can (quickly, but occasionally erroneously) type a person. It's just something I do to facilitate communication. Once I have the vibe, I know how I can best communicate with the person individually. I'll speak with an INTJ differently than an ENTJ or an ISFP or an INTP or an ESTJ and so on. I also temper this with Enneagram, if I know it, as that colors things slightly differently for each type. I also rely heavily on the dominant function more than the MBTI description, as the Ti doms are very alike to me, as are the Te doms and so on.

In this vast spectrum of possibilities, the INFJ is a fellow Ni dom. BUT if I treat them as INTJs using my harsh relentless logic, they have a difficult time with that. Not because they're stupid, but because they'll (for lack of a better description) see the Ni links but find the Te judgments "off". Therefore, for me, as an INTJ and aware of these typologies, I note this pattern and immediately "tone down the Te" if you will. I say the same things, but more gently, more softly, more considerately, more attentive to the emotive effects of my words.

W/r to INFPs, they'll look at me askance if I use this same language with them. In my experience, they tend to very much prefer the blunt Te, and it helps that I can resonate with their Fi perspective. In that arena, I'm more concerned with handling the (very subtle!) aspects of the Ne/Si perspective. With INFJs, I resonate on the Ni, and so I'm actively focusing on the Te/Fe barrier.

All types get such "special handling" from me. It's just a typology. It's like love languages, where I use the other person's language to communicate my meaning and intent.

Now, shall we discuss your tendency to take offense and look for the nearest high horse as opposed to asking someone to expand on what they mean?

 

[Starry]

*sigh* Gotta love how people take one word and run with it.

Short version: *I* have to treat them *gently*. Me, not you. Gently, not "special handling". Geez ...

To put it in context, each type, to me, has a certain "vibe", and that's how I can (quickly, but occasionally erroneously) type a person. It's just something I do to facilitate communication. Once I have the vibe, I know how I can best communicate with the person individually. I'll speak with an INTJ differently than an ENTJ or an ISFP or an INTP or an ESTJ and so on. I also temper this with Enneagram, if I know it, as that colors things slightly differently for each type. I also rely heavily on the dominant function more than the MBTI description, as the Ti doms are very alike to me, as are the Te doms and so on.

In this vast spectrum of possibilities, the INFJ is a fellow Ni dom. BUT if I treat them as INTJs using my harsh relentless logic, they have a difficult time with that. Not because they're stupid, but because they'll (for lack of a better description) see the Ni links but find the Te judgments "off". Therefore, for me, as an INTJ and aware of these typologies, I note this pattern and immediately "tone down the Te" if you will. I say the same things, but more gently, more softly, more considerately, more attentive to the emotive effects of my words.

W/r to INFPs, they'll look at me askance if I use this same language with them. In my experience, they tend to very much prefer the blunt Te, and it helps that I can resonate with their Fi perspective. In that arena, I'm more concerned with handling the (very subtle!) aspects of the Ne/Si perspective. With INFJs, I resonate on the Ni, and so I'm actively focusing on the Te/Fe barrier.

All types get such "special handling" from me. It's just a typology. It's like love languages, where I use the other person's language to communicate my meaning and intent.

Now, shall we discuss your tendency to take offense and look for the nearest high horse as opposed to asking someone to expand on what they mean?

I actually expected a far more *gentle* version of this same response out of you...and, yes, expected you would take some degree of disliking to the word "special handling" but I didn't ask for clarification because I felt I got your meaning the first time round. And after reading your explanation my post still stands unchanged. I said what I meant to say. So perhaps if you want clarification?

 

[GIjade]

INFJs have you done this?

Yes, I have done this.

What is the purpose of it?

You can't figure that out? Really? The purpose is to get rid of people who are poisonous to your life.

Why be so binary/absolute?

It depends on the reason for the door slam. Sometimes there is no alternative but to be "absolute".

It's supposedly a last resort defense mechanism where the INFJ puts up a huge wall.

Usually it is a last resort. It happens when the INFJ has tried everything in their power to resolve the dispute, but it hasn't worked.

The common thread is feeling like the INFJ is putting in all the work and the other person through their behaviors or actions is not perceived as reciprocating. The INFJ just moves on.

Yep. Exactly. The INFJ just moves on.

I thought the video was very well done.

 

[Starry]

^^I feel the need to say I keep getting interrupted...


If what I said is confusing or if there's now some doubt/confusion...i understood that uumlau was speaking from his standpoint as an individual. My concern in this regard is twofold (if not eightfold)...but I'm thinking about how often people arrive at this same conclusion when it comes to the NFJ...that there's something about who I normally am (usually but not always pertaining to speech, offensive language, rough-around-the-edges character, sharp-tongued, brutally honest authentic self) that is troubling to the NFJ and I should modify these behaviors for them. While I indicated I may be misunderstanding things myself here...I believe NFJs are just as sensitive and adverse to "inauthenticity" of any kind...preferring people not change anything beyond your standard adjustments for the different levels of public vs private behaviour... but to be exactly as they are regardless of type and degree of Te even - they can handle it... and may even out-rough-around-the-edges-you or Je-you or whatever-you etc. etc. I think there's a piece we're missing when we come to this conclusion that I have often wondered whether it ends-up increasing the distance...even in instances where it may appear to be "working".

If you are "accomodating" an INFJ in any way they will know on some level that that is happening and I think some doorslams begin right here long before that door hits the frame (or they may just commit to a superficial but warm relationship that you think goes deeper than it does which could in fact also result in them never talking to you again someday as well.)

Again...do I think I'm right?...fuck no. Do I think I know what's best for uumlau and his relationships? Yes. Okay, I lied....no. No, I do not.

Do I get nervous when I see someone say that they treat NFJs just a little bit differently for this or that reason because I think there may be something we (uumlau may be excluded from this 'we') are not understanding about NFJs and Fe in general?



Yes.

 

[estorm]

You sound like a supportive partner to your wife. It sounds like you really love her. To be able to discuss these kinds of things with your partner and help make decisions is one of the things I think makes a marriage/life partnership strong and loving. When there is no one else in the entire world to talk to, one should be able to talk to their best love. She is very fortunate to have you.

Thanks, GIjade
Yes, it's a very special connection. And I am realize I am probably the luckier one!

 

[estorm]

Your posts have a very raw feel to them. Like there's a lot of unresolved pain going on. I don't know you, obviously, so I'm merely speculating (& hopefully this does not offend). Sometimes pain can discolor our overall point of view before we reconcile it. Might be something to consider.

Yeah, you're right about that. But until I can discuss my "unresolved pain" with someone, anyone - it will remain unresolved.

[MENTION=26845]GIjade[/MENTION],

I can hear how tough it is when you can't talk things through with someone and find some solid closure. I know I hate when that happens; it just lingers (festers!) for longer than I'd like. It takes two to tango, but also to mend fences or to get satisfying closure (no metaphor for that??). It can feel unempowering at times when the other won't talk. And I know sometimes I should have walked away because talking more only made things worse. Sometimes there is no great solution.

I hope you find peace of mind around it sooner than later.

 

[Ursa]

hence they're stuck having to "door slam" to get out of such binds.

How are they stuck with this method? An alternative, more reasonable avenue to pursue is to discuss the problem with respect and explain that the INFJ's emotional needs and boundaries are not compatible with the other party's emotional needs and boundaries. Better yet, address the problem earlier on so it doesn't come to a head.

Perhaps I have misinterpreted the concept and so my own doorslam experience doesn't square with the assumptions in this thread, but it seems like INFJ doorslams are very sudden and either without explanation or complete with a sanctimonious rant/vent. Either way the INFJ's reaction provides little closure and seems like an unnecessarily harsh, childish way to handle an interpersonal issue. (This assumes the doorslam concept does not apply to extreme circumstances such as stalkers and physical abusers.)

Actually, I am not certain the doorslam is type-related. It seems awfully like a splitting behavior, which is a reaction common to NPD and BPD.

 

[SearchingforPeace]

How are they stuck with this method? An alternative, more reasonable avenue to pursue is to discuss the problem with respect and explain that the INFJ's emotional needs and boundaries are not compatible with the other party's emotional needs and boundaries. Better yet, address the problem earlier on so it doesn't come to a head.

Perhaps I have misinterpreted the concept and so my own doorslam experience doesn't square with the assumptions in this thread, but it seems like INFJ doorslams are very sudden and either without explanation or complete with a sanctimonious rant/vent. Either way the INFJ's reaction provides little closure and seems like an unnecessarily harsh, childish way to handle an interpersonal issue. (This assumes the doorslam concept does not apply to extreme circumstances such as stalkers and physical abusers.)

Actually, I am not certain the doorslam is type-related. It seems awfully like a splitting behavior, which is a reaction common to NPD and BPD.

The problem for INFJ is that they need the profound and sudden break once they reach that point. They have already accommodated to such a level that they have given up so much, that they just need to be done.

If they are not done, they will not get out but will accommodate more and they instinctively know it.

All types can doorslam. BPD behavior is very different(having seen to much of that), though is superficially similar. The INFJ is not overreacting to minor issues, blowing up over nothing. Instead, INFJ is finally reacting to a long series of things that violated their boundaries, that they excused. The doorslam is exerting freedom from their own accommodations of the other.

 

[prplchknz]

I dunno i've door slammed people and it wasn't because they did one thing it was a long pattern and finally i was like you know what fuck you bye. and it took a long time for me to get there. it wasn't they just stole my juice, I'm more likely to door slam someone who has manipulated me and part of that reason is i have a very active guilt gene and i don't like that being manipulated.

 

[PeaceBaby]

I think there's a piece we're missing when we come to this conclusion that I have often wondered whether it ends-up increasing the distance...even in instances where it may appear to be "working".

If you are "accomodating" an INFJ in any way they will know on some level that that is happening and I think some doorslams begin right here long before that door hits the frame (or they may just commit to a superficial but warm relationship that you think goes deeper than it does which could in fact also result in them never talking to you again someday as well.)

I see your issue with [MENTION=9310]uumlau[/MENTION]'s post.

ime, INFJs can seem to desire a thing they're not willing to provide. They wish for authenticity but they are not willing to be authentic. And I do not believe this is a case of semantics, of individuals possessing alternative definitions for what authenticity is.

Thing is, many people are going to perceive what an INFJ needs in order to be comfortable, like uumlau, but as soon as an individual accommodates that perception they risk being deemed as inauthentic (as opposed to being interpreted as kind and thoughtful) -- which I agree, can increase the distance as much or more as an INFJ deciding not to interact with you in the first place. INFJs vibe off expectations but when you perceptively try to meet their needs your efforts can be met with rejection and your motives interpreted through a lens of mistrust.

Catch-22. Double-edged sword.

To top it off, not many INFJs possess the self-awareness that they are asking for something from the other person that involves a level of trust that they seldom offer freely either. They are asking for something they do not provide. They want something they are reticent to give. This is where we wander into Fi space and why these threads get my attention. There's a values-based mismatch surrounding provision and expectation that wobbles and teeters on the brink of hypocrisy.

eta: it's like a poker game where the INFJ wishes to see your cards while keeping their own close to their chest. It gives them advantage, and they want this (perhaps not even consciously), in an effort to protect themselves and stay a step ahead.

 

[21%]

Everything has to go somewhere. When there's no light at the end of the tunnel, you just have to stop walking down that tunnel. I have never doorslammed people, but I think I can understand why there is a need to do so. Doorslamming means you're slamming shut a whole crapload of pain and suffering, and you've been bleeding for so long it can't go on anymore. Sometimes if it's someone you care about, you are cutting off part of yourself as well. Once that door is closed, it can't be touched ever again. You've taken the final step. You've severed a limb. You can't go back. The door has to remain shut forever, because doorslamming hurts. The decision was not arrived at lightly. It has gone through nights and days and weeks, sometimes years of agony churning in your mind. Doorslamming is the ultimate great pain that you're going to suffer one last time before it's all over. There's an absolute finality to it.


But I actually believe that there's a way to undo doorslamming -- not by banging directly on the door, but by moving around and stirring up the vicinity until the air starts to move and the reality starts to shift, brimming with new and silent changes, then the hinges will become lose and there will be a crack that you can get through.