I think the ISTP descriptions can be pretty manly sometimes. Even the title "The Mechanic" is more masculine than just about any of the other types' titles.
Having said that, I would agree with what Mae said in her post, about feeling the pressure to be a stereotypical girl. Indeed I was always more tomboyish than just about every girl around me. I was more interested in math and video games than make-up and gossip and I wanted to be a skater girl and play electric guitar while everyone else was busy chasing guys and making their friends jealous. Also, I'd rather analyze a situation than have an emotional response to it. I feel more in control that way.
On the girly side of things, I happen to love babies and animals and would do pretty much anything to take care of them. That's about all I can think of right now, lol.
Trying to think of typically girly things that i do- I can't think of any. I like writing fiction. Is that girly?
I know an ISTP woman, I'm pretty sure, right now. I work with her. She reminds me a lot of me, but she's more thinker-ish and composed. She's studying philosophy at university, and she's struggling with it, because she's a self-described "very analytical" person who likes to "pick tiny things apart" (Ti much?) but that she's used to being "active" and it's hard for her to "sit still for philosophy." Like there's two sides of her, like the Se and Ti don't quite match up. Her end consensus? "I've been studying for my philosophy midterm, I need to get laid, I'm going on a date." LOL.
I'm also casually seeing an ISTP male, more like a FWB type thing, and he's younger than me. He also reminds me of me (derp) at least when I first met him about two years ago I thought he was actually an ISFP. He's a SLEEPING CHAMP. And he's in love with music and the Internet and is insanely private about all of the crazy shit he's doing and thinking. He's really paranoid about his friends and family knowing how wild he really is, or something. He's really adventurous, a great lay, and a good stabilizing influence for me when I'm upset, because he tries to reason me out of it. He doesn't handle intense feelings well, though, and I think my Fi surprised him the first time he saw it. People IRL who live around me every single day don't see what you guys see so openly on-line, people IRL are SURPRISED when they finally see me get intense about things. It can take six months, a year. Really. Or you have to have a very intimate relationship with me. But he can get intense too, I've seen him punch a wall once.
I think Thinker females in general are a lot more trained to be "feeler-ish" and traditionally female. I tend to think this about many, many thinker women, with rare exceptions.
I agree with most of what is being said here. Of course the gender response was pretty great too: as in the picture. I relate to feeling out of place with emotional discussions. I also take a while to warm up to people: which means that I think I can trust them. I think I am very friendly. I do not share everything with everyone, so yes there are layers of trust. For a long time I didn't know that when people shared personal stories that I was supposed to share one of mine also. I definitely feel the pull of trying to fulfill stereotypical male tj roles. I can take stuff apart, and put it back together. I really don't like the "Mechanic" description. Not because of it's maleness, but because it puts a blue collar feel to a personality. I know there is nothing wrong with blue collar, it just feels like an insult to my intelligence, and to everyone else who might fit that label. Yes, it's true I like working with objects rather than people. Working with people is occasionally fun. However, that's me at work. Primarily I am an introvert. I do think we are shaped by society to an extent. I think that accounts for a lot of the difference in the male, and female, istps. Of course we all have varied upbringing, and that shapes us as well. I don't really think that the personality we started off with can survive life unchanged. My 2 cents.
Keirsey calls ISTPs Crafters instead of Mechanics. But I know what you mean, this is where some of the lame stereotypes about sensors come from are these dumb names which lead people to think "aha! I read, I'm educated, I'm not working class I must be an iNtuitive." I remember posting about this a long time ago on this forum, observing that some people had almost made type a distinction between not only IQ but level of education or social class. 0_o
Yeah, I don't think many ISTPs would call themselves crafters or mechanics either, but some would have the tools or means to handle many things like it if it came up. Wouldn't mean they made a career out of it. Personally, I'd like to fix things well enough so I don't have to think about it. I don't want to think about working and being a "crafter" all the time. I'm happily lazy, unless a problem comes up. If I could build robots to automate my life, I would.
On a sort of unrelated note, I probably figured out I was an ISTP as opposed to INTP so quickly when I picked up Meyer's Briggs because of the INTP I dated in college. When we worked on math or physics stuff together, our approach was pretty night and day. We both liked the subject, but for really different reasons. And we focused on really different parts.
I'm noticing more and more differences now between ISTPs and INTPs myself. I notice INTPS appear more "goofy" and less grounded. I work with one and he seems to over think simple facts while I'll just brush off simple facts and not over think them. When it comes to dealing with "in the moment" opportunities and decision making they aren't so keen on using the objects/variables that are thrown right in front of them. They are rather fixated on their original plan/idea.