What matters more - Type or Gender?

[highlander]

If we remove a statistical preference for Te/Ti vs. Fe/Fi (more women are F and more men are T), what matters more in understanding someone -gender or type? All things being equal (from a type perspective), how does one gender vs. the other differ in the way they:

- Relate with others
- Communicate
- Think
- Make decisions
- Act/behave

I recall reading Men are From Mars, Women are from Venus and it seemed like a comparison between stereotypical male/female MBTI types but perhaps this is a wrong assessment.

Gender differences - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A few quotes from the above Wikipedia article:

"In the big five personality traits, women score higher in Agreeableness (tendency to be compassionate and cooperative) and Neuroticism (tendency to feel anxiety, anger, and depression)."

"Males are generally more aggressive than females. There is evidence that males are quicker to aggression and more likely than females to express their aggression physically. However, some researchers have suggested that females are not necessarily less aggressive, but that they tend to show their aggression in less overt, less physical ways. For example, females may display more verbal and relational aggression, such as social rejection."

"When measured with an affect intensity measure, women reported greater intensity of both positive and negative affect than men. Women also reported a more intense and more frequent experience of affect, joy, and love but also experienced more embarrassment, guilt, shame, sadness, anger, fear, and distress. Experiencing pride was more frequent and intense for men than for women."

 

[highlander]

A few more relevant tidbits below. A lot of it seems like T vs F. I don't know....

"Misunderstandings stem from differing interaction styles
Men and women have different ways of showing support, interest and caring
Men and women often perceive the same message in different ways
Women tend to see communication more as a way to connect and enhance the sense of closeness in the relationship
Men see communication more as a way to accomplish objectives
Women give more response cues and nonverbal cues to indicate interest and build a relationship
Men use feedback to signal actual agreement and disagreement
For women, "ums" "uh-huhs" and "yeses" simply mean they are showing interest and being responsive
For men, these same responses indicate is agreement or disagreement with what is being communicated
For women, talking is the primary way to become closer to another person
For men, shared goals and accomplishing tasks is the primary way to become close to another person
Men are more likely to express caring by doing something concrete for or doing something together with another person
Women can avoid being hurt by men by realizing how men communicate caring
Men can avoid being hurt by women by realizing how women communicate caring
Women who want to express caring to men can do so more effectively by doing something for them or doing something with them
Men who want to express caring to women can do so more effectively by verbally communicating that they care
Men emphasize independence and are therefor less likely to ask for help in accomplishing an objective
Men are much less likely to ask for directions when they are lost than women
Men desire to maintain autonomy and to not appear weak or incompetent
Women develop identity within relationships more than men
Women seek out and welcome relationships with others more than men
Men tend to think that relationships jeopardize their independence
For women, relationships are a constant source of interest, attention and communication
For men, relationships are not as central
The term "Talking about us" means very different things to men and women
Men feel that there is no need to talk about a relationship that is going well
Women feel that a relationship is going well as long as they are talking about it
Women can avoid being hurt by realizing that men don't necessarily feel the need to talk about a relationship that is going well
Men can help improve communication in a relationship by applying the rules of feminine communication
Women can help improve communication in a relationship by applying the rules of masculine communication
Just as Western communication rules wouldn't necessarily apply in an Asian culture, masculine rules wouldn't necessarily apply in a feminine culture, and vice verse."

 

[Such Irony]

I think type is more important than gender. A T female probably comes in communication and behavior as more like a T male than as an F female. Same sort of thing goes for F males. They too resemble F females more than T males.

Sure, societal gender pressures can make T behaviors in females and F behaviors in males more subdued, but if you're a T, you're a T if you know what I mean.

 

[Mr. Sherlock Holmes]

Type. Gender is meaningless if you go deep enough into knowing someone.

 

[Moiety]

It's important to mention the "behavior VS cognition" dichotomy once again.

I think an ESFJ man and an ESFJ woman might think (cognition) very similarly, but might behave differently.

 

[skylights]

^ agree with the three responses above, and especially for NFP males and STJ females, both of whom often contradict the stereotypes. even as an F female i feel like some of these stereotypes aren't really applicable to me at all. they seem rather culture-bound. this seems important too...

Julia T. Wood [the person who made that bulleted list up there] describes how "differences between gender cultures infuse communication." These differences begin at childhood. Maltz and Borker’s research showed that the games children play contribute to socializing children into masculine and feminine cultures. For example, girls playing house promotes personal relationships, and playing house does not necessarily have fixed rules or objectives. Boys, however, tended to play more competitive team sports with different goals and strategies. These differences as children make women operate from assumptions about communication and use rules for communication that differ significantly from those endorsed by most me.

i think it's in part biological - women tend to act more as social glue for evolutionarily reasons, and men tend to be loners and leaders, which means women are less competitive (at a very, very deep level) in general - and i think that's very reflected in our communication and behavior - but at the same time, i wonder how much of it is culture-infused. from day one we are exposed to these thought paradigms, so really, it's no surprise if we begin to reflect them.


-
anyway, in terms of understanding someone, i suspect that has a whole lot to do with a whole host of other variables... family histories, ethnicities, how strictly you were raised, your SES, sexual orientation of both people and whether there is any potential attraction (which can lead to either better or worse understanding), social circles, your interests, your aspirations and goals and dreams, etc... on the whole i feel like similar life experiences tend to trump both type and gender.

 

[Mr. Sherlock Holmes]

It's important to mention the "behavior VS cognition" dichotomy once again.

I think an ESFJ man and an ESFJ woman might think (cognition) very similarly, but might behave differently.

Oh yes, this is a good point. On the other hand, I think an INTP male and female would probably interact rather similarly with others. They rarely possess many distinctly masculine or feminine characteristics.

 

[highlander]

I'm going to pose that I think gender results in more difference than type, on average. The evidence is all around us.

 

[Ginkgo]

First you ask which one impacts our understanding of each other more (if I'm understanding you correctly), but then you pose that genders are more differentiated from each other than types. Can you more clearly define what your question is, Highlander?

If it's the second question you insinuated in your more recent post, then I think you're comparing apples and oranges and asking "Which one tastes more fruity?" In fact, I think that's the tone of this whole thread.

My gut tells me our genders have greater effects on social awareness, followed by our preferences for either extraversion or introversion.

Our predilections for genders affect our understanding of others more so than typology because everyone except for scandalous, hooker craving politicians draws distinctions between the genders, whereas typology is very obscure.

 

[Kingfisher]

my feeling is gender defines.......
i NEVER use mbti outside this forum though.. 99.99% of people i know don't know what the fuck mbti is.

 

[Mr. Sherlock Holmes]

my feeling is gender defines.......
i NEVER use mbti outside this forum though.. 99.99% of people i know don't know what the fuck mbti is.

Wow, you must be pretty popular then if you know at least 10,000 people.

 

[Ginkgo]

Wow, you must be pretty popular then if you know at least 10,000 people.

Notice how his extraversion matters!

 

[nolla]

Oh, if I could have been a woman.

To me gender seems to be this outward pressure to not act the way I would otherwise. Of course I need to conform to it and this effects my mind as well. It's an interaction. My gender and the expectations towards it makes me use my type differently than I would if I was a woman. So, my functions are trained to behave in a way that is more appropriate for male.

On the other hand, maybe this is not too bad. Maybe the pressure toward T has made my expression of the type more balanced? If I was just the kind of man they wanted me to be, I would have no reason to question my behavior.

 

[Mr. Sherlock Holmes]

Notice how his extraversion matters!

Yes, but to whom? I don't want to know 10,000 people.

 

[Oaky]

I may deal with a woman differently to a man. Perhaps there will be a more delicate interaction when dealing with a woman. It may be slightly harder for me to say no to a woman than a man. It will certainly prove more difficult for me to punch a woman than a man. With women, there is a possibility for love interest and there is none for men. The average stimuli of sound, sight, smell and even feel of a women will differ from those averages for a man. There will be an underlying preference in these differences in everyone's thoughts and ideas. And as such my own preferences may change my thought process and actions towards a woman in difference to a man.

Personality will have it's effect in my more personal dealings. I would learn more about the woman I meet and adjust my interactions accordingly.

 

[Mr. Sherlock Holmes]

I may deal with a woman differently to a man. Perhaps there will be a more delicate interaction when dealing with a woman. It may be slightly harder for me to say no to a woman than a man. It will certainly prove more difficult for me to punch a woman than a man. With women, there is a possibility for love interest and there is none for men. The average stimuli of sound, sight, smell and even feel of a women will differ from those averages for a man. There will be an underlying preference in these differences in everyone's thoughts and ideas. And as such my own preferences may change my thought process and actions towards a woman in difference to a man.

Personality will have it's effect in my more personal dealings. I would learn more about the woman I meet and adjust my interactions accordingly.

Lol I treat everyone in one of 2 ways. Friend or not friend. I don't differentiate between men and women. If a girl punches me in the shoulder I punch them in the shoulder. I don't hesitate because my philosophy is "Treat people equally regardless of differences such as gender, race and sexuality". Although that doesn't apply to sexual and romantic matters obviously! Oh and also my other philosophy is "If you hit me, I'll hit you back, and that's not being an asshole, that's fair". This second one is good for preventing people from hitting me.

 

[Oaky]

Lol I treat everyone in one of 2 ways. Friend or not friend. I don't differentiate between men and women. If a girl punches me in the shoulder I punch them in the shoulder. I don't hesitate because my philosophy is "Treat people equally regardless of differences such as gender, race and sexuality". Although that doesn't apply to sexual and romantic matters obviously! Oh and also my other philosophy is "If you hit me, I'll hit you back, and that's not being an asshole, that's fair". This second one is good for preventing people from hitting me.

Hmm, if I go by that particular philosophy then I'd be fine hitting little kids and toddlers that hit me first.

 

[Mr. Sherlock Holmes]

Hmm, if I go by that particular philosophy then I'd be fine hitting little kids and toddlers that hit me first.

So long as it's with the same force!

No, well really it just applies to people who are a similar age to me. Fortunately I don't get random little kids hitting me very often. If they do, just block them. They get frustrated and eventually leave.

 

[Oaky]

So long as it's with the same force!

No, well really it just applies to people who are a similar age to me. Fortunately I don't get random little kids hitting me very often. If they do, just block them. They get frustrated and eventually leave.

I see.

There are too many cases for one to treat others differently depending on the situation for someone to treat someone equally. I will try not breach my integrity by doing something I personally find unethical. If a girl punches me I will not punch her back. If a physically disabled person punches me I will not punch them back. If an emotionally shattered man punches me I will not punch them back. My main concern would be directed at understanding why I was punched for if my only reason to punch them back is because they inflicted some physical pain upon me, that may make me more worthless than they are.

But then this is a discussion on ethics. It will be subjective and will depend on the person's values.

 

[Mr. Sherlock Holmes]

I see.

There are too many cases for one to treat others differently depending on the situation for someone to treat someone equally. I will try not breach my integrity by doing something I personally find unethical. If a girl punches me I will not punch her back. If a physically disabled person punches me I will not punch them back. If an emotionally shattered man punches me I will not punch them back. My main concern would be directed at understanding why I was punched for if my only reason to punch them back is because they inflicted some physical pain upon me, that may make me more worthless than they are.

But then this is a discussion on ethics. It will be subjective and will depend on the person's values.

Uh... well perhaps I was too ambiguous with what I meant. I was just reffering to casual situations. I wouldn't punch someone back either if they were obviously in a lot of distress or had a handicap. But being a woman isn't the same as either of those. There's only a mild physical difference. I don't initiate harm on a woman or anything. I'm not going to assault anyone. But for example, one of my female friends used to punch me when she was annoyed at me, but when she did, I returned it, and after a while she learned that if she hits me she gets the same back, and so she doesn't do it anymore. I had a similar thing with a male friend, except it was more mild. They don't think I'm an awful person for it or anything, because I've explained that I am using equal force against them because I'd rather not get hit. Simple. Easy. Nobody expects special treatment either, and they know it and accept it.