[INFP] Could INFPs lack a compatible type?

[BerberElla]

I was thinking about something similar to this when I was drifting off to sleep last night, I ran through all the types on my head, trying to match them up with me and came up with bubkiss as an ideal match.

But that might be because it's an ideal, perfect pairing that I was thinking about, rather than a relationship which might involve a bit more work.

So I quickly discarded my musing, told myself not to give up and to be more realistic about what I wanted.

So Mr right, watch out, I'm on my way basically lol.

 

[briochick]

first, it's *highly* unlikely that any one person doesn't have a match. Because that's what we're talking about, people, not incompatable software programs. Not 2 wheel vs. 4 wheel drive on different terrain. People. Now, it may be true that INFPs in general are personally resistant to finding a mate, either through pacificity, idealism, lack of confididence, or lack of motivation (I don't meant motivation to find a mate, I mean motivation period).

Also, having grown up with a dysfunctional ENFJ (imagine a dominant person, controlled by raging emotions who is violently sure that everything they feel and think in any and every given moment is the truth AND that they belief they know exactly what you're thinking and why), and knowing that anyone who you're with could, eventually, end up as their worse selves, I have one response: I'd rather drink bleach.

That being said, relationships take risks and even I could be proven wrong. I think it's about who you click with, and no chart or statistic is going to give you that answer. Some theories you're off are better not obsessing over. Try to add observation and personal experience in with the theory, rather than just what you've read, and get other people's opinions too, then reavaluate the theory to see if it still fits.

 

[nolla]

What if INFPs are meant to be a catalyst for other relationships, but are not meant to engage themselves?

Then why do I have these things hanging from my groin?

I think the number one reason for someone to not think of me as a potential mate and daddy material is because I am so lazy. Laziness is such a negative trait in this kind of world. It would be different in a tribal village where the work would pretty much just wait there close by for someone to do it and I would like to contribute in the well being of the tribe.

Now, I need to present myself so that I seem like the best for the job, and this seems to me like lying. Then I need to put up with bad management that stresses me out because they don't care for the human but for the product, this I see as a negative environment for my mental health. Then, if I after many years get a promotion I would still have to implement the same "machine" attitude to the other people of the company. So, it seems like many work related things are incompatible with my thinking... How could I be assertive in this kind of world?

Maybe I am rambling but anyway, I hope you get the point. If I was the kind of active person they expect me to be, the girls would probably take me more seriously (I mean, who is proud for dating a bum). I am just a bit reluctant to make such an amount of sacrifices to be taken seriously. I've worked so hard to get away from the negative environments that it seems like giving up.

 

[PeaceBaby]

But that might be because it's an ideal, perfect pairing that I was thinking about, rather than a relationship which might involve a bit more work.

But doesn't every relationship involve work of some kind, even an ideal fantasy-land one?

My hubby is ESTJ; we get the sparks & chemistry from being opposites, and complement each other's strengths / weaknesses. I have to be careful to stand my ground from time to time; he has to work at meeting me in the middle rather than having a pre-formed opinion.

Relationships are meant to help us grow. So if you meet someone, and you get that great vibe, and both parties are willing to work together and communicate, why would an INFP have any less likely a shot at being happily coupled than anyone else?

 

[BlackCat]

What if INFPs are meant to be a catalyst for other relationships, but are not meant to engage themselves?

I often have this issue. I like to help people with their relationship problems (and often times I fix the problems) but I never really get anything myself.

However, your theory is flawed. Any type works with any type. My problem was that I wasn't being assertive enough, when I started being assertive I started to be more successful on the relationship side. If you think that you cannot be with someone SIMPLY because of a personality theory then you are an idiot (to put it bluntly). Don't be picky about your relationships, if there is one little thing that bothers you about someone then try to get over it. In the long run you will regret pushing away the person. I know this is true, I have firsthand experience.

I have a decent amount of friends who are a multitude of types. I get along with all of them even though I see the difference. I think the differences are something to grow from, not something to be afraid of. This is the list of friends: INFJ, ENFP, INTJ, ISTJ, INFP, ESTJ, ISFP, ENFJ, INTP, INTP, INTP, ENTJ, ENFP. Yep, no particular order. I think the person I benefit from the most out of those is the ENTJ, simply because he forces me to exercise my Te while I force him to exercise his Fi (we work together) but we both have an understanding of things through intuition, and that understanding is on different wavelengths from each other (him having secondary Ni and myself having secondary Ne) giving us stuff to talk about.

So don't rely too heavily on MBTI. It's a tool for understanding people, not for judging and shunning them away.

 

[Udog]

What if INFPs are meant to be a catalyst for other relationships, but are not meant to engage themselves?

This is a very interesting way of suggesting that we are good with dealing with emotions when they are someone else's, but not so consistent at confronting and dealing with our own feelings.

 

[BlackCat]

This is a very interesting way of suggesting that we are good with dealing with emotions when they are someone else's, but not so consistent at confronting and dealing with our own feelings.

I can relate to this. Dealing with someone else's feelings can be a bit easier than dealing with mine, but I have never had an issue dealing with mine. It was just a bit more difficult.

 

[Chris_in_Orbit]

The problem is not type, it's maturity and preferences. For instance, ENFJ's dislike passivity, which is what INFP's are known for, and INFP's dislike assertiveness, which is what ENFJ's are known for. Each likes the aspect in the other because they don't have it, so a middle ground has to be established, but that's true for any relationship.

You mean aggressiveness?

 

[Chris_in_Orbit]

Hi everyone!

As an INFP, I think too much I'm guessing or maybe hoping that I've managed to think myself into a corner and am missing something obvious.

With that said, I don't mean this to sound like a feel sorry thread. I'm just looking for some different views on the topic.

So I get the whole complementary type theory, like ISFP/ESTJ, making the best pairing. But I've also found that the world tends to design for the majority. It's possible that the complementary theory works well with SP/SJ types, but is not blanket rule for all personalities.

I find SPs fun to hang out with, and then tend to be able to pause my endless thinking for a bit so I can just have a little fun. But beyond that, there isn't much connection because they don't seem to get me. There ends up not being enough depth for anything serious.

SJs generally like me and I think often confuse me with an SP, thinking that there isn't a storm behind the calm they see. I respect and get along with them, although they tend to think there is something broken about me that they need to fix.

According to the theory, NTs should be the best match. I suppose my longest relationship was an NT, but I always struggled with the coldness that I felt. She was an INFJ, so maybe if she was an ENFJ it would have been different. But I have to wonder why the lack of NTs in my life.

That leaves NFs. I only learned about personality types in the past few years, so I didn't know this while they were happening, but it seems that the closest past relationships I've had have been either INFPs or ENFPs.

Only the INFPs turned into full relationships. The ENFPs seemed to do a better job of encouraging communication. But in all of the cases, there seemed to be some situation that got in the way. If we got past whatever situation in the beginning, it came back to bite later. But sadly, without some sort of situation going on, we don't seem to meet and get close in the first place.

So this has left me thinking that it really shouldn't be this difficult. If it is, the maybe something else is going on. Which leads me to my latest idea on why this may be happening.

What if INFPs are meant to be a catalyst for other relationships, but are not meant to engage themselves? This sounds really dire if you look at it from an individual level, but stepping back and looking at this from a species, maybe it makes sense. It certainly would explain why something that should be a natural process would be so insanely difficult.

I told you I think too much.

Alright, finding an ideal match is never easy. I'm sure things are catered for sensors because they are a majority...but I don't understand the purpose of this theory. I mean, there are happily married INFPs out there, just like all the other types.

You said you saw the value in the other types but you want a deeper connection, and what seems to be some sort of instant understanding. That sort of thing is rare for a lot of people, not just INFPs.

If you want someone to totally understand you, you're probably going to have to wait quite a bit. I'm sure that person is out there too... I think its way too early to say that you haven't found someone who doesn't click with you, therefore there must not be a perfect match for your type. I might have followed your logic wrong but thats the path it seems to have taken.

 

[saxman]

Reading more of the comments, I guess I can see why I arrived at the theory, but that it is probably an oversimplification of the complex nature of human relationships. At least it is thought provoking.

I wonder why I haven't run into many ENFJs. I had a friend who was INFJ, and we got along pretty well, although I can completely understand the passivity/assertiveness issue. E types almost always end up finding me, so maybe I should be saying I haven't had many ENFJs run into me.

One thing I've noticed I do sometimes is mimic other personality types. If I'm around someone else, I'll start picking up their mannerisms and ways of handling situations. Sometimes that will help with meeting other people, although they eventually get confused when the real me comes out. It's like what friends often say... just be yourself, except more assertive, and more outgoing, and less emotional, ...

 

[Siegfried]

Reading more of the comments, I guess I can see why I arrived at the theory, but that it is probably an oversimplification of the complex nature of human relationships. At least it is thought provoking.

I wonder why I haven't run into many ENFJs. I had a friend who was INFJ, and we got along pretty well, although I can completely understand the passivity/assertiveness issue. E types almost always end up finding me, so maybe I should be saying I haven't had many ENFJs run into me.

One thing I've noticed I do sometimes is mimic other personality types. If I'm around someone else, I'll start picking up their mannerisms and ways of handling situations. Sometimes that will help with meeting other people, although they eventually get confused when the real me comes out. It's like what friends often say... just be yourself, except more assertive, and more outgoing, and less emotional, ...

The NP factor, allows us to blend in on conscious and subconscious levels, especially due to the influence of intuitive Ne. This could account for why INFPs even question their own type. Its interesting the balance, the utility of becoming whatever you wish at the expense of confusing others and yourself of your true self.

 

[saxman]

This is a very interesting way of suggesting that we are good with dealing with emotions when they are someone else's, but not so consistent at confronting and dealing with our own feelings.

That is an interesting way of looking at this. I think that is very true.

 

[antireconciler]

Ok, I'm not willing to give up on the theory that easily.

... if an INFP is simply supposed to be a catalyst for other relationships, and maybe write cool poetry and love songs, then maybe it's ok.

You can find out quickly if you have a type ... do you WANT to have a type? If so, you do. Because what you're saying is that you want someone to be able to love you and appreciate you for who you are (that's half of it) and that's hardly difficult, and that you want to love someone and appreciate them for who they are. But if you wanted to, what could stop you?

Another way to think about it: saying that INFPs are just good for catalyzing other relationships makes it sound like INFP's are good at being martyrs. Do you think martyrs have any good advice when it comes to relationships? Someone who sacrifices themselves has nothing of value to add to a discussion about communication, which requires two parties, because someone who sacrifices themselves wouldn't know anything about that. All they know is one party, their own. As soon as they entered communication, their sacrifice would remove them from it.

Any type works with any type.

Really is some truth to that. It's amazing how different people can be and you can still develop feelings for them. I think people can get stuck on soulmate theory, always looking for the perfect person who never comes in part because it can support our ability to fantasize about ourselves as special. It lets us idolize ourselves.

 

[Unique]

Hi everyone!

As an INFP, I think too much I'm guessing or maybe hoping that I've managed to think myself into a corner and am missing something obvious.

With that said, I don't mean this to sound like a feel sorry thread. I'm just looking for some different views on the topic.

So I get the whole complementary type theory, like ISFP/ESTJ, making the best pairing. But I've also found that the world tends to design for the majority. It's possible that the complementary theory works well with SP/SJ types, but is not blanket rule for all personalities.

I find SPs fun to hang out with, and then tend to be able to pause my endless thinking for a bit so I can just have a little fun. But beyond that, there isn't much connection because they don't seem to get me. There ends up not being enough depth for anything serious.

SJs generally like me and I think often confuse me with an SP, thinking that there isn't a storm behind the calm they see. I respect and get along with them, although they tend to think there is something broken about me that they need to fix.

According to the theory, NTs should be the best match. I suppose my longest relationship was an NT, but I always struggled with the coldness that I felt. She was an INFJ, so maybe if she was an ENFJ it would have been different. But I have to wonder why the lack of NTs in my life.

That leaves NFs. I only learned about personality types in the past few years, so I didn't know this while they were happening, but it seems that the closest past relationships I've had have been either INFPs or ENFPs.

Only the INFPs turned into full relationships. The ENFPs seemed to do a better job of encouraging communication. But in all of the cases, there seemed to be some situation that got in the way. If we got past whatever situation in the beginning, it came back to bite later. But sadly, without some sort of situation going on, we don't seem to meet and get close in the first place.

So this has left me thinking that it really shouldn't be this difficult. If it is, the maybe something else is going on. Which leads me to my latest idea on why this may be happening.

What if INFPs are meant to be a catalyst for other relationships, but are not meant to engage themselves? This sounds really dire if you look at it from an individual level, but stepping back and looking at this from a species, maybe it makes sense. It certainly would explain why something that should be a natural process would be so insanely difficult.

I told you I think too much.

BS.

There is somebody for everybody, INFPs can just never make up their minds and when they do always seem to make weird choices (One of my best friends is an INFP)

Relations between Psychological ("personality") Types

I 100% am sold on the socionics theory of relationships and their relations of duality truly are an amazing pair.

 

[hopeseed]

I think it's harder to find companionship as an INF. Honestly, I think there are many reasons. Perhaps it is the need for deep connection and not everyone in the world seeks that as earnestly or passionately as INF types. Also maybe INF’s expect a lot (hey we have a lot to give) It’s the idealism thing…I know I’m generalizing, that’s what typology’s all about. Ok forgive me, but I really think that INF’s are also rare people and highly individualistic in many ways…so it’s a tall order to fill. I think when we do find the right person, it’s the most deeply romantic love story. I tend to think other INF’s are good for each other if some other compatibility is there to.

 

[Siegfried]

I think it's harder to find companionship as an INF. Honestly, I think there are many reasons. Perhaps it is the need for deep connection and not everyone in the world seeks that as earnestly or passionately as INF types. Also maybe INF’s expect a lot (hey we have a lot to give) It’s the idealism thing…I know I’m generalizing, that’s what typology’s all about. Ok forgive me, but I really think that INF’s are also rare people and highly individualistic in many ways…so it’s a tall order to fill. I think when we do find the right person, it’s the most deeply romantic love story. I tend to think other INF’s are good for each other if some other compatibility is there to.

INFs are very much romantic idealists and the rarity of the type, combined with the desire for a deep connection, can make it seem like there is no one, but its worth it, as you say when INFs find the right person, its like a story itself. .

 

[jtanSis1]

Maybe the problem with INFP's is that we took on too much of others and have forgotten how to truly be ourselves. Maybe we need to clean out the traits of others and be ourselves again, because when I read about my type, I always know I can be that way, but I keep forgetting. The few times when I am myself completely, I just know that I have no problems with anything. Perhaps that is the purpose of INFP, to take on every type in order to work out every problem possible in their types, so that we can overcome anything, even ourselves, and become the ideal which we strive for. Maybe we just lack this level of maturity, which is why we don't seem so desirable or compatible.

 

[CrystalViolet]

This thread is depressing.

 

[simulatedworld]

I have a close INFP friend who had a pretty long and healthy relationship with an ENFJ. It didn't end up working out for whatever reason, but ENFJ is definitely a good match for you. You could also try another INFP--my INFP roommate has an INFP girlfriend and they've been together for years and are perfect for each other.

According to socionics you should try ESTP. Not sure if I buy into that, really, but at least there's someone else's suggestion.

 

[simulatedworld]

BS.

There is somebody for everybody, INFPs can just never make up their minds and when they do always seem to make weird choices (One of my best friends is an INFP)

Relations between Psychological ("personality") Types

I 100% am sold on the socionics theory of relationships and their relations of duality truly are an amazing pair.

So is it a coincidence that every ISFP girl I meet is kinda cool but not really that attractive to me?