[ESFP] From an ESFP: Why is everyone so surprised when I say something intelligent?!

[KarenParker]

I'm a total economics nerd and a politics junkie. One thing that really gets under my skin is when I make a comment about something related to those two interests and someone acts surprised or expresses some kind of disbelief that I would actually have something intellectual to say. Why does that always seem to happen to me?! UGH! :steam:

 

[Amargith]

Coz EXFPs are known for being fun and light hearted..we're apparently not supposed to be smart. Don't let it get to you. I personally consider it quite funny when they underestimate me..means they'll be less inclined to keep an eye on me or see what I'm up to and (if they have it coming) how I'm going to play them

 

[Jeffster]

Hatas jus be jellus.

 

[Tallulah]

Do you present an image similar to the one in your avatar? If you act like a party girl, you can't really be surprised if people see you that way. People tend to sort of put other in niches, and you might have solidified yours before presenting another side of yourself.

The other thing is, not everyone will know you like your friends know you. When people say, "I didn't expect that out of YOU!"--it's a good sign to me that they don't know me very well, and they kind of want to put me in a little box. That's fine, but they probably won't be more than acquaintances to me.

 

[phoenity]

I'm a total economics nerd and a politics junkie. One thing that really gets under my skin is when I make a comment about something related to those two interests and someone acts surprised or expresses some kind of disbelief that I would actually have something intellectual to say. Why does that always seem to happen to me?! UGH! :steam:

When people perceive you in such a way, they limit themselves, not you. Their perception has nothing to do with who you actually are.

Are they just surprised that you have those interests? Or do they go so far as to disregard you and your comment?

Either way, I say don't worry about it! Who wants to be predictable anyway? Keep them on their feet - it shows that you are conscious

 

[Giggly]

Either way, I say don't worry about it! Who wants to be predictable anyway? Keep them on their feet - it shows that you are conscious

Exactly. Consider it a good thing, Karen.

 

[onemoretime]

Haha, it's usually relief on my part. "Thank god someone can engage - let's see what happens!"

 

[entropie]

I'm a total economics nerd and a politics junkie. One thing that really gets under my skin is when I make a comment about something related to those two interests and someone acts surprised or expresses some kind of disbelief that I would actually have something intellectual to say. Why does that always seem to happen to me?! UGH! :steam:

Stereotypes, the world is made of it. But consider that, esfps are said to be ingenius diplomats and politicians. Maybe you can change peoples attitude one day ?!

 

[Athenian200]

I'm a total economics nerd and a politics junkie. One thing that really gets under my skin is when I make a comment about something related to those two interests and someone acts surprised or expresses some kind of disbelief that I would actually have something intellectual to say. Why does that always seem to happen to me?! UGH! :steam:

To be honest, I'm kind of shocked myself.

That is definitely not the kind of thing I'd expect from an ESFP. This is the shock of being impressed, not of being bothered, though. I guess you're a real-life example of this.

It's just that, well... when you see a goofy party girl type being all silly and fun and self-indulgent... you kind of assume she's a ditz. Mostly because a fun, indiscriminate, goofy, self-indulgent ditz is considered the foil to the ascetic, solitary, perceptive, intellectual in literature. Those are the two archetypes in people's minds, with or without MBTI.

Part of the reason such people are considered ditzes is because they enjoy "shallow" or "cheap" fun, rather than "sophisticated" fun. There's also the idea that their judgment is impaired in some way because they tend to judge people and events superficially, like by what they wear, their hair, the convenience or immediate fun of it, etc, rather than their character or symbolic meaning.

People often make the mistake of assuming that temperament and character are related to aptitude and interest in particular arenas.

The two interests you described, for instance... go completely against your temperament. They're the sort of thing people expect NTs to be interested in.

 

[MonkeyGrass]

I have an ESFP friend (maybe she'll show up in here) who is an absolute barrel of monkeys. Total fun and spunky bubble of enthusiasm. And, sometimes, yeah, it floors me to hear her rattle off statistics in her matter of fact manner (woven in with enough humor to make your head spin).

Then, I remember that in order to have that kind of sense of humor, you have to have quite the fact head. ESFPs are some of the quickest wits I know, fact-wise!

 

[onemoretime]

I'm a total economics nerd and a politics junkie. One thing that really gets under my skin is when I make a comment about something related to those two interests and someone acts surprised or expresses some kind of disbelief that I would actually have something intellectual to say. Why does that always seem to happen to me?! UGH! :steam:

Now that I think about it, economics and politics make perfect sense as a source of intellectual inspiration for an ESFP. There's an inherent understanding of the system as a set of interactions between people - that it is impossible to separate such things from their human element. I wonder, do you ever find yourself forming "attachments" to certain figures, such as a well known politician or say, Friedman or Keynes, in a somewhat personal way?

I wonder if that's where some of the "ditz" stereotype comes from - it's not that you're unintelligent, it's that you've been so effective at negotiating the social landscape, because you have an inherent grasp of the skills and interactions necessary to make people like you, and form a large social circle. That's the practical reality of politics. You also understand the ability of all these individual actors to create a massive collective effect - that's the practical reality of economics.

Or did I get this all wrong?

 

[Jeffster]

The two interests you described, for instance... go completely against your temperament. They're the sort of thing people expect NTs to be interested in.

Not true. Plenty of people of the SP temperament are interested in politics, and many have been very successful politicians and business people. We've had several SP presidents of the US. If someone believes interest in politics and economics "goes completely against" the SP temperament, then that person does not understand it very well.

 

[NewEra]

Not to sound mean or anything, but maybe it's just because you're ESFP. Again, I personally don't have a bad view on them at all. Not in the least.

 

[Athenian200]

Not true. Plenty of people of the SP temperament are interested in politics, and many have been very successful politicians and business people. We've had several SP presidents of the US. If someone believes interest in politics and economics "goes completely against" the SP temperament, then that person does not understand it very well.

I'm not talking about truth, I'm talking about perspective.

There's a big difference between what people associate with things, and how they are.

The typical description of the SP temperament hints against that sort of interest because of the cultural archetype it gets associated with, and only someone who had done a lot of research on specific SPs as individual people, not as a group, would see the potential for such interests.

It's because there's a tendency in our culture to say "work OR play," "serious OR fun," and "intelligent OR popular" as if the two are mutually exclusive.

Even worse, you often get the amalgamation "Serious, intelligent worker OR playful, fun, popular." This is really how quite a few people see things. So if you're intelligent, people also expect you to be serious and work hard (seeing any lapse in this as the result of trying to be something you're not). And if you're playful and popular, people don't take you seriously. I've had a lot of people complain about this happening to them in society.

The thing is, people often have the same kind of archetypes floating around in their head that MBTI describes (even if they've never heard of it), and make the same kind of ridiculous generalizations without even naming them.

 

[Jeffster]

I'm not talking about truth, I'm talking about perspective.

There's a big difference between what people associate with things, and how they are.

The typical description of the SP temperament hints against that sort of interest because of the cultural archetype it gets associated with, and only someone who had done a lot of research specific SPs as individual people, not as a group, would see the potential for such interests.

It seems to me a strange medium area. Someone who doesn't care about type/temperament studies obviously wouldn't stereotype "SPs" because they wouldn't even be aware of that label. And anyone who actually cared enough to read about it, you would think it would take no time at all to learn beyond just a few buzzwords or stereotypes.

I would think those people that are interested enough to read anything about it, yet too mentally lazy to go beyond initial stereotypes, would be a pretty small group.

 

[Athenian200]

It seems to me a strange medium area. Someone who doesn't care about type/temperament studies obviously wouldn't stereotype "SPs" because they wouldn't even be aware of that label. And anyone who actually cared enough to read about it, you would think it would take no time at all to learn beyond just a few buzzwords or stereotypes.

I would think those people that are interested enough to read anything about it, yet too mentally lazy to go beyond initial stereotypes, would be a pretty small group.

They wouldn't be stereotyping SPs per se, but they still stereotype being popular and fun as being opposed to being intelligent and serious. This is actually rather common even among people who don't use MBTI. I know because people have complained about assumptions others made about them because of one behavior.

For instance, read this popular tale. People often really think this is how people are. The Ant and the Grasshopper

 

[Jeffster]

They wouldn't be stereotyping SPs per se, but they still stereotype being popular and fun as being opposed to being intelligent and serious. This is actually rather common even among people who don't use MBTI. I know because people have complained about assumptions others made about them because of one behavior.

Oh yeah, I agree with you about that. In fact, when people on this forum have moaned about those who have "bought into MBTI" as a way to stereotype people, I have tried to point out that personality patterns exist, no matter what you label them, or if you don't label them at all.

Another thing I've pointed out is that perspective can greatly vary from an extremely limited view of someone to knowing pretty much all that person has the ability to express. So if I knew Karen only from seeing her at parties, I might think of her as a "party girl" and not expect her to start talking about politics or subjects seen as more "serious." But if I lived with Karen and spoke to her on a regular basis, I would obvious gain much more insight into her varied interests.

So it's not even about how much time you spend with someone (you can know someone for 30 years, but still only spend time with them in a very limited capacity) but more about how many varied activities or environments you experience that person in, and how willing you are to learn about a person. Some people are very keen to see all people as mere members of groups or categories. I believe that's a very narrow way to view people, and it's a much better idea to get to know someone as an individual, while acknowledging that every person has some common behavior patterns with plenty of other people.

 

[Galusha]

unfortunately, people make assumptions based on stereotypes. if you watch a movie with a "ditz" character, you'll notice, 90% of the time, that character is an ESFP. bad writing contributes to the belief that people like this never have anything interesting to say.

but don't worry-- I totally disagree. the intelligent comments are glorious when they appear; surprise (hey! cool!) is not the same as shock (WHAT?!). please keep the gems coming

 

[onemoretime]

Oh yeah, I agree with you about that. In fact, when people on this forum have moaned about those who have "bought into MBTI" as a way to stereotype people, I have tried to point out that personality patterns exist, no matter what you label them, or if you don't label them at all.

I wonder why others do not see it as a positive thing - a powerful tool for one to use to negotiate the human landscape. Seems to me that life is a lot easier when you can back up and say "well, this guy seems like a jerk, but really, he is more concerned with maintaining X quality than I normally would be. that actually could be useful, so there's no point in getting worked up over it". It also helps in the sense of "oh, that person isn't really trying to be insensitive, in that person's mind, they're just using hard logic without any sense of the emotional impact... could be interesting", or "i don't understand why that person is so upset, all i didn't say anything insulting... but it could be interpreted that way if you're not inclined to immediately interpret things in the same way that i do. in fact, now that i think about it, i'd probably be upset about that if it were said to me, too".

I don't see why people wouldn't find that the realization of people's cognitive processes being truly different is quite liberating - you're you, they're them, there are people like you, there are people like them, no one is better or worse in this process - just different.

 

[Eowyn]

Now that I think about it, economics and politics make perfect sense as a source of intellectual inspiration for an ESFP. There's an inherent understanding of the system as a set of interactions between people - that it is impossible to separate such things from their human element. I wonder, do you ever find yourself forming "attachments" to certain figures, such as a well known politician or say, Friedman or Keynes, in a somewhat personal way?

I wonder if that's where some of the "ditz" stereotype comes from - it's not that you're unintelligent, it's that you've been so effective at negotiating the social landscape, because you have an inherent grasp of the skills and interactions necessary to make people like you, and form a large social circle. That's the practical reality of politics. You also understand the ability of all these individual actors to create a massive collective effect - that's the practical reality of economics.

Or did I get this all wrong?

I don't think you're wrong. I tend to be able to grasp the dynamic between groups pretty quickly, and since it makes sense to me pretty quickly, I don't usually spend a whole lot of time talking about it. Since I get it, it doesn't require the verbal processing that individual relationship dynamics and other things do.

I have an ESFP friend (maybe she'll show up in here) who is an absolute barrel of monkeys. Total fun and spunky bubble of enthusiasm. And, sometimes, yeah, it floors me to hear her rattle off statistics in her matter of fact manner (woven in with enough humor to make your head spin).

Then, I remember that in order to have that kind of sense of humor, you have to have quite the fact head. ESFPs are some of the quickest wits I know, fact-wise!

It is I.

The barrel of monkeys has arrived.

Facts generally aren't fun. There is enough boring in life that I like to think about the fun. I usually know the facts--they're just not as fun to talk about.