Dear Fe User,

[DiscoBiscuit]

I would call that just being in control of your emotions.

Like you said, I wouldn't call it such.

I would call what you are talking about reading people and being aware of social niceties.

 

[Fidelia]

Interesting.

Does it feel like Fi-users are often being inconsiderately emotionally imposing and/or being overly critical to you, even when it isn't in the form of an emotional outburst?

Sometimes yes. That's when Fe gets bossy and prescriptive and Fi users either arch their backs and hiss or else feel attacked. Sometimes it just seems like they feel their needs are the most important and they either bring up a bunch of little things or they don't give enough information that I can address the problem before it spins out of control. Sometimes it is said publicly which seems needlessly conflict inducing or unproductive or makes certain people needlessly look bad when change or addressing a problem could be addressed much more effectively privately.

It's only now that I've realized that the purposes for communicating these things are different that I am more able to step back and see it more for what it is. I feel less responsible for trying to change everything around with myself and the rest of the group to accommodate the "unhappy" member voicing their criticisms or feelings.

 

[Sunny Ghost]

i don't think manipulate carries negative connotations. people have manipulated for the purposes of evil, but by definition...

Definition of MANIPULATE
transitive verb
1
: to treat or operate with or as if with the hands or by mechanical means especially in a skillful manner
2
a : to manage or utilize skillfully b : to control or play upon by artful, unfair, or insidious means especially to one's own advantage
3
: to change by artful or unfair means so as to serve one's purpose : doctor

 

[Synapse]

I don't think it does to Fe users. I really don't identify my emotions as an integral part of my identity. It's more like symptoms or information that may direct me to look at factors I may not otherwise give as much weight to.

Its probably an introverted issue more, a reservation to state aspects of emotions, rather than being a negotiator or just being as diplomatic as the situation necessitates?

 

[Thalassa]

Oh, also my ex and I used to talk about "twinkling" at people, "projecting sex," etc. all of those things are emotional expression with intent of eliciting a certain reaction.

 

[Synapse]

Wow this thread has some kind of pace!

 

[Fidelia]

Oh, also my ex and I used to talk about "twinkling" at people, "projecting sex," etc. all of those things are emotional expression with intent of eliciting a certain reaction.

Okay, said in those terms, I understand what you are talking about Marm, and yes I do that. For example, when teaching I may use a serious expression when talking about something with a kid so that they understand this is different than usual, even though I do not feel upset or emotionally invested. Again, it's because I want to get my end goal achieved, not because I care so much about my expression reflecting an important part of who I am or what is inside of me.

I understand what you mean about twinkling at certain people etc.

@ IAJ I kind of took the word to mean the definition of 2b or 3. Didn't realize others didn't. Whoops! Oh yeah, and I know we're on the same page. No worries there!

@ Synapse - can you expand on that a bit? EDIT: reread and agree.

 

[Fidelia]

I'd like to say that I've noticed my ENFJ mother and also my friend Protean both tend to be more outspoken than me, even though we tend to assess situations similarly and have the same kind of emotional reaction. I tend to underexpress and my mother tends to overexpress in the initial reaction moment, so I'm not sure exactly how it looks from their point of view. I should qualify that my comments are highly tinged by INFJ ness Fe and I'm not certain how universal that is to other Fe flavours.

 

[Southern Kross]

i think a lot of Fe users are misconscruing what others mean when they say "manipulative." manipulate in the Fe sense isn't necessarily a negative thing... but it's along the same lines of trying to reach a certain outcome.

earlier, you wrote:
No matter how you put it, it's a manipulative behavior. but it doesn't mean it has to always be deemed as negative.

Manipulative for me always carries negative connotations and I just have assumed it does for all people. When you describe a person as being manipulative, it is not assumed to be a good thing. It implies deceitful craftiness and using a person's weaknesses against them. Maybe it doesn't mean that to everyone?

I think the point is that the definition of Fe behaviour is different depending on whether your are an Fe-user or Fi-user. Fi-users have quite a broad and encompassing definition of 'manipulation', whereas Fe users may prefer to call what Fi-users accuse them of, something along the lines of 'social finesse'.

^ Southern, couldn't a simple outcome be venting/catharsis? To me, outcomes aren't necessarily convoluted and complicated.

Hmmm.

I don't mean to say that Fi-users never have an intention behind their actions. I tell jokes to make people laugh and show sympathy in order to comfort others but usually the intention is rather explicit. We are more open and outright in expressing intentions, where Fe-users are more indirect or implicit in their methods. When I have intentions, I rarely wish to conceal them (and in fact, struggle to do so, which is often the problem) but to me an integral part of Fe style interaction is that others not consciously recognise the process they are using to achieve their goal. In other words, it is important that others not know that you are seeking a specific result because it would undermine the process itself. It would be like saying "I'm trying to cheer you up" while engaging in a series of actions that would (hopefully) result in cheering that person up - it breaks the spell, so to speak. And I guess the fact that it seems rather like an attempt to cast a spell, that it appears secretive and calculated, is what causes Fi-users to react so negatively to it.

The thing about Fi-doms in particular is we can conceal our feelings but we struggle to conceal intentions. We can't skillfully illicit a desired response from others - we are either misunderstood or we just make complete fools of ourselves. I think this is at the heart of why we often suck at social interaction.

Sorry, I'm having trouble effectively explaining this...

 

[Sunny Ghost]

I think the point is that the definition of Fe behaviour is different depending on whether your are an Fe-user or Fi-user. Fi-users have quite a broad and encompassing definition of 'manipulation', whereas Fe users may prefer to call what Fi-users accuse them of, something along the lines of 'social finesse'.

Hmmm.

I don't mean to say that Fi-users never have an intention behind their actions. I tell jokes to make people laugh and show sympathy in order to comfort others but usually the intention is rather explicit. We are more open and outright in expressing intentions, where Fe-users are more indirect or implicit in their methods. When I have intentions, I rarely wish to conceal them (and in fact, struggle to do so, which is often the problem) but to me an integral part of Fe style interaction is that others not consciously recognise the process they are using to achieve their goal. In other words, it is important that others not know that you are seeking a specific result because it would undermine the process itself. It would be like saying "I'm trying to cheer you up" while engaging in a series of actions that would (hopefully) result in cheering that person up - it breaks the spell, so to speak. And I guess the fact that it seems rather like an attempt to cast a spell, that it appears secretive and calculated, is what causes Fi-users to react so negatively to it.

Sorry, I'm having trouble effectively explaining this...

haha. much earlier on in this same thread i actually brought up the same--Fi often lacks this subtlety. and honestly, i applaud Fe for this ability. i've had many a Fe's save me by employing this tactic. like i said, it is a manipulative behavior, but not always a bad thing. it's an active molding of the situations at hand. i gave the example of my boss basically being a jerk to me, and an ISFJ who stepped in and using this gift of non-verbal, non-direct guardianship, basically protected me and stood up for me, as well as not offending our boss at the same time. were it the other way around, and my boss was being a jerk to the ISFJ and i felt it was necessary to do something about the situation... i would have been much more blunt that my boss was being a junk and more open about the fact that i was trying to stand up for the ISFJ.

i've tried to learn this Fe tactic, but i'm just not as skilled at it. if i'm trying to cheer up a friend, i'll actually probably be very open about the fact that this is what i'm trying to do. i might make a joke like, "cheer up, emo kid." or perhaps try to help them see some positives in a seemingly negative situation. but it's also not as if Fe's don't take the personal and open road as well. but speaking of the group situation, where one person is obviously not on the same happy plane as everyone else, this is where the Fe excels.

 

[Glycerine]

I think the point is that the definition of Fe behaviour is different depending on whether your are an Fe-user or Fi-user. Fi-users have quite a broad and encompassing definition of 'manipulation', whereas Fe users may prefer to call what Fi-users accuse them of, something along the lines of 'social finesse'.

Hmmm.

I don't mean to say that Fi-users never have an intention behind their actions. I tell jokes to make people laugh and show sympathy in order to comfort others but usually the intention is rather explicit. We are more open and outright in expressing intentions, where Fe-users are more indirect or implicit in their methods. When I have intentions, I rarely wish to conceal them (and in fact, struggle to do so, which is often the problem) but to me an integral part of Fe style interaction is that others not consciously recognise the process they are using to achieve their goal. In other words, it is important that others not know that you are seeking a specific result because it would undermine the process itself. It would be like saying "I'm trying to cheer you up" while engaging in a series of actions that would (hopefully) result in cheering that person up - it breaks the spell, so to speak. And I guess the fact that it seems rather like an attempt to cast a spell, that it appears secretive and calculated, is what causes Fi-users to react so negatively to it.

The thing about Fi-doms in particular is we can conceal our feelings but we struggle to conceal intentions. We can't skillfully illicit a desired response from others - we are either misunderstood or we just make complete fools of ourselves. I think this is at the heart of why we often suck at social interaction.

Sorry, I'm having trouble effectively explaining this...

Ahhhh, I wasn't trying to insinuate anything. I just meant that I as a Fe user won't necessary try to find a long winded motivation behind an Fi user's emotional expression and sometimes might just indirectly assess the situation as venting/catharsis..... which is also a worthy outcome and let them get it all out.

 

[Thalassa]

Fi often lacks this subtlety.

Yes. I think I relate to what you say here.

And by the way, I know several ENFPs who are quite capable of engaging in manipulative behavior.

Noted.

 

[Sunny Ghost]

^ a lot of the descriptions on ENFP's usually state this, don't they? but i think the connotation there is often associated with a negative one, correct?? often trying to manipulate the opposite gender to feed one's own Fi?? i've known an unhealthy ENFP whom had quite an effect on many of my male friends. we always called her the ultimate playa and she knew how to work the game.

sorry, off topic.

 

[skylights]

oh gosh, i pasted my comments to respond to in Word and it was 17 pages long… that’s what i get for not keeping up with the thread. so… a summary of my points

• i feel like i say this all the time… but i think that Fi and Fe both are geared towards social harmony.

Fe comments

• lol @ fidelia’s mention of being intrigued at the nature of relationships of strangers. i see this IRL. my best friend LOVES doing that. i find it mildly entertaining if i’m bored, but for the most part would rather think / talk about other things.
• i do not see much of a difference in the Fe-related behavior of my ESFJ mom and ENFJ best friend. perhaps that is just them, but if they are a good model for others (and they seem relatively representative of their types to me), then there is really not that much of a difference in how they use Fe. i think the differences are more in why - in how they analyze people and situations. the ENFJ is more calculating and future-focused – she chooses who she wants “in” and “out” and acts accordingly. the ESFJ is more stabilizing and present-focused – she works hard to keep strong bonds with the people she likes and essentially ignores those she doesn’t. from what I can see, they use the same Fe tactics to different Ni/Si goals.
• as for the chess game:

i agree with Z that it's a bit freaky. sometimes a whole lot freaky. it’s exactly what he said:

It's your guys' game, not mine. […] this game can have an effect on me, even if I don't want it to. […] I don't want to worry about how this or that is going to hurt my "position" in this "chess game" that I don't even want to be a part of

also, perhaps this is related to being a Ne dom - but it feels very uncomfortable to have everything i do always under scrutiny for how consistent i am (note: i am not very consistent when it comes to behavior) or to have someone predicting my next move (note: half the time i don't even know what's coming next).

No wonder there is confusion. Fe users are spending all their time trying to work out what outcome I'm trying to achieve, oblivious to the fact that most of the time I'm just blathering on about the things that pop into my head, without even the vaguest intentions attached to them.

i suspect Ps naturally leave space for randomness and chaos; it’s assumed in our thoughts and behavior. if you don't account for that then it'll throw off the calculations.

i think that's essentially the crux of my annoyance with the game. i don't have a problem with others having an impact on me in a way i can't choose, or being held accountable for my actions, but the game eliminates freedom. it doesn't leave any room to just be.

Fi comments

• i agree with highlander that it’s easy to get intuition and feeling confused – perhaps Ne and Fi especially. they’re both so “fluid”.
• synapse: “Other times, most times really, I observe the frequencies. […]. That is much akin to seeing a persons intimate aspect of themselves beyond their own awareness of how much their interpretative state is charged from the energy that is integrated, created and diffused. And the passions and imaginations and the analysis that spills forth is from a source of being in their frequency that is often in or out of alignment to themselves.” beautifully put, and
• in response to protean’s comments about Fi users seeming to accuse Fe users of having a moral void, i see what you mean. i think it can come in part from the odd realization that everyone does not value-weight every. single. thing., like we do. that does not mean others do not have morals, of course, or that their ethics are not as strong.

In summary, a few key points I took out of this:
A person who prefers Fe is drawn to or focused on the following things:
- The group, its associated dynamics, culture and how it functions.
- Patterns of behaviors and motivations that others seem have in the group.
- Society more broadly and how you can give back or contribute to it
- The dynamics of how people relate to one another
- Understanding individual's behaviors, motivations, desires and beliefs
- Understanding the nature of the relationship between you and this other person - with all of its nuances
- Assessing consistency of behavior of individuals and behavior with social protocols
- How decisions, actions, or expressed opinions are going to be reacted to, countered or felt by others and weighing benefits and costs of the course of action
- Using all angles of how the group works, connects, gets along (or doesn’t) and all of their views and then deciding what course of action is most amenable to the intended goal while accommodating the most people

i relate to the three bolded. obviously i am interested in all of these points, being a human, but the bolded ones are very natural / effortless to me.

i find the italicized one very important, but not incredibly natural to me. i also have some hesitation about just "accommodating the most people" - generally i would like to accommodate the most people as possible but while still making sure that a certain minority is not getting consistently ignored, or very hurt by the majority decision.

ENFP comments (lol was not really expecting discussion of ENFPs here)

And by the way, I know several ENFPs who are quite capable of engaging in manipulative behavior. But don't worry - it is all for your own good

I have seen this in other ENFPs. They user their persuasive skills to get others to do things that are good for them (say like quitting smoking).

i have noticed that ENFP Fi-related behavior (possibly ESFP's too) is very interesting because it can seem very much like Fe in person, if one’s social skills are well developed. it is similarly warm, outgoing, engaging, and, yes, somewhat manipulative. i would have a hard time telling the difference IRL if it were not for the J/P divide. like Poki said – “i do Fe actions because it pulls Fi out of people.”

a lot of the descriptions on ENFP's usually state this, don't they? but i think the connotation there is often associated with a negative one, correct?? often trying to manipulate the opposite gender to feed one's own Fi?? i've known an unhealthy ENFP whom had quite an effect on many of my male friends. we always called her the ultimate playa and she knew how to work the game.

hm, "feeding off" - do you mean feeding off positive responses from other people? i could see that easily. the nature of Ne and Fi together makes for good people pleasing because Ne is good at adapting in the moment and Fi is good at knowing what others want/need, and it's pleasing to F in general to please others. it can certainly be used in a negative way, or a fairly neutral way (eg accidentally leading people on when you're just trying to be nice to them), or at its best it can manifest the "champion" behavior for which keirsey named the type, to help people see the best in themselves and empower them to become their own advocates.

 

[MacGuffin]

Pfft shows how much you know. Hitler may have been INFJ. Either that or ENFJ.

Henceforth, let us all Godwin Fe/Fi threads in such a manner.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

ooh, highlander, i meant to comment on your statement about Fe's being less judgy the Fi's.

i think there is some truth to that. but the use of the term judging or making a judgment is meant a bit different in MBTI terms. one's more organized and conclusive... the other a bit more sporadic and non-conclusive.

the interesting question is why? why are the judging functions of Fe's, Te's, Si's and Ni's more organized and conclusive than the perceiving functions of Ne's, Se's, Ti's and Fi's?

looking at each function alone wouldn't necessarily give us an answer. by that i mean, simply comparing Fi to Fe. but pair that with a type's other function... one can see how we get one that is called a perceiver and one that is called a judger.

however, i think each introverted function on it's own merit could easily be considered judging. every persons introverted function is weighing out and deciding the value of a person, idea, theory, consistency, etc.

Pi likes keeping it’s internal options open, and it’s rigid about the external world.

Pe is rigid about internal options (judgments), and it likes keeping external options open till last minute.

Pi’ers are more immediately malleable/adaptable with judgment.

Pe’ers are more immediately malleable with/adaptable to external environment.


Also: outside of even the mbti definition of judgment being different- using judgment is not the same thing as being judgmental. Using judgment is about discernment, without necessarily adding a positive or negative value; being judgmental is about being critical, assigning an excess of negative value to things. And the word 'judgy'- as it's used in this thread, I'd guess- would mean something inbetween, maybe a kind of hastiness to place positive or negative value? Because I agree that Fi'ers tend to assign positive or negative value faster than Fe'ers- for Fe'ers, it's more relative to context.

 

[sculpting]

This thread has been very enlightenting.

I am left a bit confused on a few issues:

I am somewhat saddened by the thought that if attempt to emotionally connect to an Fe user, in my mind to renew an Fi connection during times of stress, it will be taken as a request for them to act. This is very bizarre to me as if I needed them to act I would directly request they act on my behalf.

I also realized I will project my ENFP worldview onto ENFJs. Meaning when they approach me in an emotionally expressive manner, I tune them out as they come across as irrational and overly emotional. I assume they are ranting and once they calm down, we can have a productive rational discussion, so I forgive and ignore the ranting-like I would to an ENFP. In reality it seems they are trying to deliver finalized judgments. Oh dear that's rather funny. oops. Hehehe.

A question-assuming when Fe users approach and express an Fe judgment-What is the best way to say "I am sorry, I disagree. It seems we will need to agree to disagree over this topic as we see it differently" ? Typically I affirm them (Fi), then try and explain my position (Te)-which they describe as rationalization since they have judged it differently.

 

[IZthe411]

Pi likes keeping it’s internal options open, and it’s rigid about the external world.

Pe is rigid about internal options (judgments), and it likes keeping external options open till last minute.

Pi’ers are more immediately malleable/adaptable with judgment.

Pe’ers are more immediately malleable with/adaptable to external environment.


Also: outside of even the mbti definition of judgment being different- using judgment is not the same thing as being judgmental. Using judgment is about discernment, without necessarily adding a positive or negative value; being judgmental is about being critical, assigning an excess of negative value to things. And the word 'judgy'- as it's used in this thread, I'd guess- would mean something inbetween, maybe a kind of hastiness to place positive or negative value?

Agreed on both- which underscores the discussion here that Fe isn't consistent across all of it's users. It's based on individual discernment, so it will differ in how it's expressed.

I'd like to add, before someone comes in here and contends that Si isn't open, and their Je isn't malleable - that's false. I don't want that to take over the thread- we can discuss if necessary.

 

[IZthe411]

This thread has been very enlightenting.

I am somewhat saddened by the thought that if attempt to emotionally connect to an Fe user, in my mind to renew an Fi connection during times of stress, it will be taken as a request for them to act. This is very bizarre to me as if I needed them to act I would directly request they act on my behalf.

Their actions would be appreciated, nonetheless. Hopefully what they choose to do isn't so drastic that they've somehow encroached on you.

 

[PeaceBaby]

Reading through the thread ... some interesting stuff, although now having participated in a bunch of these threads it does feel like the same ground covered in other threads, rephrased in some new, some old ways.

Here's the crux of what I find challenging:

I get emotional sensory input from every person I meet. I'll just be shopping or out walking or driving my car and I get a read on people, as I have said before like a radio station that's always on in the background. Whether or not you believe that, or question the accuracy of what I "hear" - that isn't really important atm. What I want to convey is that I often get a read on an emotional state that doesn't match the outer behaviour or expression. Sometimes an Fe user will appear overly cheerful or overly angry and I don't feel like their inner state reflects the intensity of that expression. And sometimes, I can feel they are seething or frustrated or super-sad but when you ask them how they are doing, they say they are fine, and try to give off every appearance of doing so.

Now, from reading so many responses in all of these threads, I understand more deeply why one might choose or not choose to emote, and how removed from emotions Fe users can tend to see themselves. But to a large percentage of the population, when you think you are concealing what you really feel, I want you to know you aren't, and because of that people can't help but think Fe is fake or phony. And, there are times that concealing emotions or using them like a tool doesn't serve anyone's purpose at all and will distance people from you that could help you work through those feelings and see that they often have a purpose, they have something to teach. At least that's what what feelings are like to me.

So, I don't know what to do about that, fully, still. I try to gather enough data about a person to try to understand them as best I can, despite the contradictions I sense. It does seem unnecessarily complicated at times though - when I choose to emote I have no intention but being honest to how I really feel. No agenda.

Being totally honest and open about how one feels - to me, that's the greatest gift.

Thanks all for sharing here on how you see the world.