[NF] INFPs, what do INFJs do that drives you nuts?

[PeaceBaby]

In my case, I got a clear message in childhood that expressing emotion of any kind was inappropriate and other people did not want to deal with my emotions. Even "I am angry" didn't cut it. I think that this is also a strong message that comes from the culture/society in which I grew up. So, you could add this as a third reason.

Yes, thank you, that's a great addition.

In a huge irony to my post, I seldom express emotions myself, but I am working on un-suppressing my suppression. Here on the forum is a venue that I've tried to experiment with, being more open with emotions. Since they constitute the framework of my world, suppression has proven to be helpful more for short-term issues. I can't evade how I'm wired.

That's why I say, when OA does it here, it's kind of a big deal to an INFP.

 

[Society]

good reads... and very confusing, at least for one aspect alone:

can i ask (both INFx's): what's with all the "we" and "us" when referring to.. basically, your own experience within yourself?

i mean, it seemed like the whole shenanigan and consequential conflicts here started from how other people seen members of your own type as representatives of your type and daring to generalize from one's own experience. why is this now done repetitively by both sides of the debate towards their own respective types?

is this like that thing where i am allowed to make Jew-jokes but can frame anyone else who does that as antisemitic?

 

[PeaceBaby]

can i ask (both INFx's): what's with all the "we" and "us" when referring to.. basically, your own experience within yourself?

A valid point and question. The answer for me: basically a handy short-hand, that although imprecise, conveys the meaning adequately. You'll note that all of us, INFJ and INFP, along the way somewhere, state disclaimers that we are not necessarily representative of all members of our type. I personally don't do that in every post of a thread, and I probably haven't done it for quite a while here.

I personally don't think that's why the conflict started though.

 

[Society]

A valid point and question. The answer for me: basically a handy short-hand, that although imprecise, conveys the meaning adequately.

what's shorter then the word "I"?

 

[PeaceBaby]

I'd like to add too, that there's something about an Ni dom that can reduce my reservation about sharing emotional inner workings.

I've wondered about this for quite a while and been kind of trying to articulate the why, but I'm not quite there yet.

 

[PeaceBaby]

what's shorter then the word "I"?

Nothing. What makes you object however?

 

[Society]

Nothing. What makes you object however?

i am just finding it very curious:

For the INFPs to a lesser extent, because you somehow wouldn't expect that from Fi dom's (edit: yes, i do realize the irony).

for the INFJs because so many of them where all pissed about how the many of the INFPs here (and later me as well) were making generalizations based on specific INFJs from their respective lives, and now many of the same INFJs are doing the same (given that the INFJs in their respective lives are themselves).

and honestly, if i caught an ENTP doing that...

 

[PeaceBaby]

For the INFPs to a lesser extent, because you somehow wouldn't expect that from Fi dom's (edit: yes, i do realize the irony).

As an so-dom, I do think in terms of "we" - of groups - quite a bit. It might be notable that SK is an so-dom as well, that may explain both of our tendencies to do that.

But yes, I realize it's as presumptuous to generalize now as it was in the beginning. Should throw the disclaimers in and watch the terminology.

Plus, I expect any INFP who reads through and disagrees will get a *ping* from their Fi-truth-o-meter and correct me from their perspective (if it matters enough to them.)

 

[Fidelia]

I'm a so dom too, so that might account for some of it. However, I would only use we because of the particular contributors here and the history I have with them. For example, although Z Buck, Tilty, SilkRoad, cascadeco, and fia may express themselves slightly differently, they all have shared reactions and ideas individually and in a few threads and seem to follow a pretty similar course of thought, or else they would feel comfortable clarifying if they disagreed with me. With Puddle River, AA, Eillonwy (sp) and the others, I have a less extensive history, but the sentiments they express line up pretty well. Therefore, I feel comfortable using we, with the underlying understanding that I don't really consider myself as a spokesperson and am open to correction.

In the other examples, someone has already had a negative history with the person in question, their behaviour doesn't really align with anything that seems very familiar to me, and I haven't met them, so can't really judge for myself about how much or little we are on the same page. At least for me, that is the distinction.

 

[Southern Kross]

You just made me think of something. I think the way we reassure people or let them know we are on their side is not playing devil's advocate until we are invited to and even then, by degrees checking at each stage to see what they can handle and how they are receiving the information. That doesn't necessarily mean whitewashing for the sake of harmony. It's just that it can't happen unexpectedly or all at once, or the person assumes that you don't like them and are on opposite sides. I think this is why the INFJs were so adament that inquiry has to start from similarities and a friendly perspective, while OA likened it to ripping a bandaid off slowly - both inefficient and unnecessary.

Yeah, I'm not great at doing things like expressing myself by degrees and I would say it's a INFP trait too. INFJs are Fe+Ti which is kinda in the middle of the openness and expression of self 'spectrum'. Fi and Te are the two extremes, so it tends to go from zero to 100 then back to zero again. It's hard for me to find that balance.

So when you are reassuring someone, what would that look like? I think there is a certain comfort that all INFJs find in discovering someone who understands them or who notices things that other people don't. That was one thing that my INFP friend was extraordinarily good at. She noticed a lot of the undertones that most people don't and quite intentionally, but quietly did things to help put people at ease or help them. So perhaps it just depends on degrees of relationship at how much of my inner world is openly talked about. Again, throwing the hints out there that you notice something, but not saying anything too directly is a good way to open the conversation, as it then allows the other person to either follow up on them or not as they feel comfortable. It seems to me that many NFPs are already pretty good at this.

I usually try to validate their experience, and maybe offer examples of when I felt like that, as a way of showing I understand what they're feeling. If a friend is telling a story about an experience and I sense their frustration, I want to find a way to say, indirectly, "that must be frustrating". I figure people often feel circumspect about the validity of their feelings and sometimes want to hear, "it's OK to feel that". It's like I'm trying to undo all the self-doubt they may feel; the fear that they are being silly, unreasonable or overreacting; that they are all alone in feeling that way.

On Saturday, I had a conversation with my ENFP friend (and her INTJ husband), where she told me about how her paternal grandmother had recently died. She's originally from China and her parents were over here on a long holiday, so when they found out it was this huge wrangle to pack up their things, cancel bookings and organise a flight for them back to China. She told it like a story rather than from the emotional angle (she's not much of a crier either), but I imagined it was a difficult time for her. She was saying about how stressful and how strangely sudden it was - how there was no time for grieving in the upheaval. She seemed to be stuck in a place where she felt terrible about what was happening to her dad but also was dealing with her own feelings. On top of that, she said that everyone has been saying to pass on condolences to her father but they aren't recognising that it was actually her grandmother too. I tried my best to listen and mirror her feelings - interpreting and then reframing what she said in a more distilled way to get at the emotional core. I asked questions about how they dealt with practical issues, to show I recognise all the stressors involved. I asked her if she was close to her grandmother (this I wouldn't usually do but it's an effort to be more Fe like and supportive). I told her a story about how when my parent started a round the world trip and only got as far as Hawaii when they got a phone call telling them that my Dad's father (whom he worshipped) had been killed in a car accident. I talked about what my mum said about the awful time they had. How they sat by the hotel pool, with my dad staring into space like a zombie, trying to pass the time before the next available flight home. How hard it was to be far away from home and feel useless at such a time. We talked about it for some time, until I felt she had gotten all the stuff that was in her head off her chest. I worried both in the moment and afterwards if I was being supportive enough. I wasn't very emotionally demonstrative; not doing the whole hugging and overt sympathy thing (I'm so bad at this). She seemed to respond very well to what I did say but I can't help worrying if she felt I didn't do enough...

So, do you actually want to ask questions? Is it just that it feels too invasive to do so? What kinds of things would you usually be wishing to ask, but not feel free to? Again, remember that (at least INFJ Fe users) often have difficulties processing in the moment and also figuring out what they are thinking or feeling without actually verbalizing it. Therefore, you are not gossiping or being nosy, but you are doing a great and helpful service. We often forget to verbalize this, I think because we overassume that everyone processes in this way and we underestimate how taxing it can be on some people to go through this process, as we don't find it taxing ourselves. It's interesting (as it helps us understand the person better), it's a compliment to us that someone respects us enough to need our services, and we like to be helpful. So it's confusing to realize that when other people do this, they are doing a whole nother process under the surface as well and it's not as easy as just asking a few questions and showing some support.

Of course, I want to ask those questions! Sometimes I'm dying to know more. A (ENTP) friend of mine once told me that her mother died of breast cancer when she was child. I had a million questions in my head. I wanted to know how young she was at at the time; whether it was slow or relatively sudden; what the experience was like from a child's perspective; how her dad and her family coped; I wanted to know if she felt she had really missed out on crucial things; whether it still effects her etc etc. Not only did I think these would be rather invasive, I felt my own curiosity too much - I felt that asking would be feeding my selfish need, rather than supporting her desire to speak about it. We did talk a little about it later on but it was about a specific aspect rather than a general tell all. I was too chicken and too self-conscious to ask much though - I did the whole talk around the issue to give her the chance to speak if she wants to thing, instead. The thing is I'm so bloody awkward about addressing such intimate details and this is another reason why I keep quiet.

Yeah, I guess it's strange that we are both very private and very open. I mean, there's almost no question that I would feel offended at being asked, provided it was done with decent intentions. If I didn't feel comfortable answering, I'd probably say that directly. Mostly though, anything that's already been processed feels kind of impersonal to me, so it's no big deal to talk about. Anything that I'm working through and have revealed is of concern to me means that I'm open to talking about. It's only the stuff that is still highly emotional and just under the surface that I may not be ready yet to talk about and usually people don't even know about it (I mean, they may sense it's there, but that's about it).

Really? I don't know... even if you say that, I'm still going to be pretty wary about it. The problem is, it's not just that I'm worried about being told to butt out, I'm worried about the things you wouldn't say. Like you might feel upset or grilled or that I'm being presumptuous without explicitly saying so and then would change how you behave towards me or look at me. On top of that, sometimes it's wrong to address certain things not just because it will upset someone, but because it's just wrong for me to bring it up.

The thing is that I'm also keenly aware of how just much I know about people. I know deep, personal things that people would never imagine I could know -and I'm pretty sure I could almost guarantee that most people wouldn't ever want to talk about that stuff. Besides the fact, I fear there would be no way of phrasing it without it sounding presumptuous and obnoxious. If someone does invite me to discuss an issue openly I'm almost always going to really water down what I say, unless, perhaps if they ask what I really, seriously think.

I agree that INFJs are a little bit difficult. I do sympathize with anyone dealing with me. There are some characteristics that even I feel are frustrating and I've lived in my head for a long time and know what's in there! I can only imagine how exasperating it would be if it's opposite to anything that you are familiar with seeing in the landscape of your own mind.

No more so than the rest of us.

So, if I feel your negative emotions under the surface, but you deny or don't state their existence, this is a mixed message to us. INFP's sense this emotional undertow, but when INFJ's don't say it (and usually you won't say it) your written words contradict what we are picking up from the interior message. In a sense I guess, it feels like a data mis-match. Kind of like your mis-match, but from a different angle.

Obviously this mis-match is the primary source of our communication failings.

Yes, the emotional undertow (great metaphor) as you put it is so significant to INFPs. Even if we're not pointing it out to others, usually we're getting a reading on it and reacting to it. We might not know what it means or even consciously register it, but we feel the pull on us. It helps us anticipate what others need from us or what we need to indirectly address in our behaviour toward that person, among other things.

As an so-dom, I do think in terms of "we" - of groups - quite a bit. It might be notable that SK is an so-dom as well, that may explain both of our tendencies to do that.

But yes, I realize it's as presumptuous to generalize now as it was in the beginning. Should throw the disclaimers in and watch the terminology.

Plus, I expect any INFP who reads through and disagrees will get a *ping* from their Fi-truth-o-meter and correct me from their perspective (if it matters enough to them.)

Yeah, I don't usually do the whole "we" thing when talking about INFPs. I worry that I'm going to overstep my bounds and start sounding like I presume to speak for all INFPs. This requires a whole lot of disclaimers, like "this might just be me", or "I'm not sure if this is true of all INFPs" etc. But Ne does want me to make generalisations and sometimes if I feel it's likely to be relatively universal, I'll say "we". I might still feel wary, but sometimes the generalisation needs to be made to clarify what I mean. If I made a sweeping generalisation and then other INFPs didn't relate, I would feel pretty bad.

I do think that PB and I being So-firsts is a factor. So-firsts do like to generalise about differences between groups of people, because we find comparisons to be useful and revealling.

 

[Tiltyred]

For example, although Z Buck, Tilty, cascadeco, and fia may express themselves slightly differently, they all have shared reactions and ideas individually and in a few threads and seem to follow a pretty similar course of thought, or else they would feel comfortable clarifying if they disagreed with me. With Puddle River, AA, Eillonwy (sp) and the others, I have a less extensive history, but the sentiments they express line up pretty well. Therefore, I feel comfortable using we, with the underlying understanding that I don't really consider myself as a spokesperson and am open to correction.

Just popping in to affirm this. I am comfortable with Fidelia, Cascadeco, Fia, ZBuck, et al saying "we," knowing that includes me. And I feel comfortable using "we," believing that if any other INFJs feel differently, they'll acknowledge the commonality, point out the individual difference, and go on with the discussion. We're speaking of ourselves as representatives of our type.

 

[PuddleRiver]

In my case, I got a clear message in childhood that expressing emotion of any kind was inappropriate and other people did not want to deal with my emotions. Even "I am angry" didn't cut it. I think that this is also a strong message that comes from the culture/society in which I grew up. So, you could add this as a third reason.

Same with me. Weird.

 

[PuddleRiver]

Just popping in to affirm this. I am comfortable with Fidelia, Cascadeco, Fia, ZBuck, et al saying "we," knowing that includes me. And I feel comfortable using "we," believing that if any other INFJs feel differently, they'll acknowledge the commonality, point out the individual difference, and go on with the discussion. We're speaking of ourselves as representatives of our type.

I'm comfortable with it as well, and very appreciative.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

[usual disclaimer: I'm not caught up- there's a few pages here I still haven't read- but I'm posting anyway.]

I see. Yes it is difficult. The problem from a NFP perspective is that we don't really think in those terms, either in how we read someone else or how we present ourselves.

In OA's case it could totally be both : ie. she is both a victim and someone simply making herself out to be. The NFP thinks, "People get a bit dramatic when they're angry or hurt, so sometimes they might inadvertently misrepresent the situation or talk in hyperbole. That's no reason for me to completely disregard what they're saying" - this comes back to what I was saying about emotions being merely signs and not throwing the baby out with the bathwater. We then try to mine what we can from what is said, to find nuggets of truth (ie. search for the essence), without worrying too much about the 'veils' (ie. the anger, pain, and possible misrepresentation). To us finding those nuggets is a sign that there is value in what that person is saying. That is verification to us that she is, at least in part, not making it all up and falsely making herself the victim; that she isn't entirely blinded by a ridiculously bad interpretation of the events involved or by some personal vendetta against INFJs.

It’s not like it’s one or the other to me either. But there are some people where the ratio of seeming to be completely unaware of the extent to which they seem to feel entitled to directing others to think or believe what they want exceeds the extent to which they actually did deal with ‘cruelty’ of some sort is the determining factor. And a lot of that, I believe, can be gleamed from how much a person directly demonstrates feeling entitled to making us- here in the forum, as people interacting with this person- thinking or believe what they want without feeling obligated to listen in turn. Like I said, it’s not fool proof, but it’s still relatively effective. Where “INFJ trauma” has been cried- I have noticed that people either get aggressive and even angry that their opinion isn’t swallowed in it’s entirety (indicating someone who regularly feels entitled to directing others) or they just stick to their thought pattern by not being able to break out of a looping cycle they are stuck in; the latter, I’d say, has possibly dealt with the kind of INFJ who is so blinded by their own coping mechanisms that they really can’t see they’re causing harm (I say this because I’ve been there, I’ve been stuck in that looping pattern and I believe it really is ultimately about just wanting that INFJ's narcissistic behavior- and the hurt they caused- to make sense). The former however, I won’t lie, I suspect the INFJ fled because the person is unbearable. My point here is that I don’t see it in black or white either- but think the ratio will usually lean in more one direction or the other.

[fwiw: I don’t have a congealed opinion in this regard about OA. My preliminary guess is that while she’s definitely driving INFJs away with the issues she’s accumulated, I’m inclined to think (because of the way she’s described it) the issues are more because of some badly behaved INFJs than not. I can’t say I believe the same about everyone who shows up complaining about us though.]

And one final thing, thank you for saying you feel contempt in such circumstances. I think that is part of what we NFPs sensed, but couldn't really put into words. This is partly what I meant about mixed messages - saying you're willing to engage on one hand, and then appearing a little contemptuous on the other. This is also why I said it felt like the INFJs were biting their lips early on in the thread; we sensed latent hostility behind the attempts to engage. OrangeAppled (perhaps having experienced this before) reacted more strongly too it and became more hostile in response. Whereas, others like PB and myself (not having any particular wounds to be reopened) tried to clear up the Essence of problems as we sensed it. I suppose (again, Ne sometimes takes a while to work out what even it's entirely on about) we wanted you to see past the ('veil' of) negativity of OA's post and how she might have some good points regardless, and then that ('veil' of) contempt would disappear and a useful conversation would eventuate.

I had a rather bad reaction to this^, and then read this:

Does it seem just as out of nowhere/unnecessary/intrusive to try to recreate your thought patterns as it does to us to recreate someone else's feelings as if you were experiencing them? If so, I can better appreciate just how frustrating our responses must be throughout the thread, as it would appear that we are talking about and attempting to do two completely different things. I remember soon after coming here, telling someone about some experience and even in print feeling their deer in the headlights response of not knowing how to respond in the moment, while they tried to feel exactly how I was feeling. I found the response puzzling as it was totally foreign to me at the time and seemed self-centred somehow. I can see better though if it mirrors my need to understand someone's path of thinking, it is necessary for understanding the situation and trying not to do that is like purposefully becoming blind or deaf and then trying to navigate an unfamiliar situation.

Yep.

I do not consider that initial ‘charged’ feeling- of feeling some sort of urgency to clear up what’s going on- to be “contempt”. I reserve “contempt” for the kind of feeling that isn’t transient and doesn’t go away once the smoke has cleared. I was annoyed by *something* and I’ve been trying, in this thread, to work out what that *something* is. I think mostly it’s exacerbating to have someone feel the need to want to point it out in the moment- before the smoke has cleared- because it’s like forcing an issue to me. That’s the kind of thing that someone else will get wrong if they try to label it- like, 999 times out of 1000- so yeah, unnecessary and intrusive sums it up. It seems weird to me because trying to hurry that kind of assessment (figure out what the feeling is before it’s had a chance to even settle) will usually result in the assessment being wrong. Even if I try to put labels to it myself, they are usually wrong (in the moment). So it’s beyond foreign to me that anyone could immediately *need* that information from me…..I don’t even have immediate access to it myself.

And going back a ways… (and hopefully this answer the question about the parenthetical statement as well)

It seems like playing stupid? Wow. That's a really manipulative thing to do, and it's not something I want to come across as at all.

Can you offer advice on presenting that "raw batter" in a way that's not seen as a finalised conclusion? I thought OA did that (in some places) and that I've been doing it too by offering disclaimers, but now I wonder if this is not the way to get it across to Pi users.

I’m not very good at coming up with ‘how to’ stuff because I’m not very good at memorizing & applying it myself (and so, I have no idea if there’s a way to say it that would be helpful). I’m not very good at memorizing surface instructions or ‘rules’ of anything where interpersonal interaction is concerned. The only way I learn how to get along better is if I directly understand the reasoning behind the ‘rules’. And so the only way I know how to answer this is to explain why the ‘raw batter’ is ‘raw batter’.

I mentioned that Fi’ers are more tolerant of someone complaining about their shoe getting scuffed because they stepped on someone else’s foot- whereas FJs are more likely to react with “Are you kidding me?” The problem with hearing Ji/Pe’s ‘story’- instead of presenting a story to serve as a proposed synopsis of ‘shared reality’- it can be very simply “this is how I was affected.” But in esse, ‘raw batter’ sounds very much like “Me. Me me me.” We hear this as someone attempting to propose a synopsis of ‘shared reality’ because that’s what we present ourselves. We survey the situation, take all relevant points of view into account and come up with a crude synopsis to work with. Singling out our own story in the beginning seems superfluous- that stuff is refined privately afterwards. It’s like “okay, let’s start with this and then if there’s something that turns up later in the way we process it, we can discuss it later”. So your “This is how I was affected” response to our proposed ‘shared story’ turns into “Hmmm….here’s what I actually think the shared story is: me, and maybe even a little more me.” It’s why that exaggerated summary Starry left is actually an accurate translation of what it sounds like (imo)- I mean, right down to reciprocating the so-called ‘unvarnished truth’ aspect (because let's face it- 'unvarnished truth' is just an impression, not ‘altered’ to sound more diplomatic or take ‘fairness’ into account because that would be ‘dishonest’?). Like- I knew full well when I read it that it doesn’t even begin to reflect what OA’s argument was *supposed* to be, but it brought ‘clarity and relief’ by making a caricature of how it was coming across.

In ongoing analogy terms: we look at the size, see if it’s in our price range, we cut it down to the barest essentials to suit our “2 garments per visit” threshold for discussion. You guys ‘bake’ it aloud against each other- we can’t do that, it needs to bake internally. So when you guys walk up to the dressing room with your arms absolutely full of clothes that haven’t been baked at all- I think the lazy Ni assessment (the first thing that comes to mind, what it would mean if we were the ones doing it) is that you’re presenting “Me me me. Also: me. The spaghetti? That’s me too. The shared story should be all about meeeeeeeeee.” But really you’re presenting “this is the affect this had on me” in hopes of hearing something similar in return (which we actually can’t give, because we aren’t immediately in touch with our own story enough to be able to do that)? It’s like you really do need to see stuff on in the mirror before figuring out it will or will not work? And by trading enough “this is the affect it had on me” with each other, a ‘shared story’ is built from that….whereas we (Ni) want the most succinct possible initial ‘shared story’ so that we can get to work on figuring out what it *really* is….and then come back with the new version to ‘try on’ in a mirror, rinse and repeat.

[I have no idea how much sense I’m making anymore. This thread. OMG. I’m at the point where I’m not sure I know what words mean.]

I presume this is the equivalent of INFJs coming across like (as Saturned wrote): “YOU’RE A HORRIBLE PERSON WHO DOES HORRIBLE UNICORN KILLING THINGS.” Just hearing that makes me (and note to self: put up walls around Fi’ers, because clearly they hear secret messages telling them I have opinions that I don’t actually have). I’m not going to presume I understand the exact Ji/Fi process, how the lazy Ji assessment (the first thing that comes to mind, what it would mean if you were the ones doing it) finds that when we ask ‘why’…..but I know it’s nothing like what’s actually going through my head. Same with the thing about “Fe thinks it’s RIGHT”…..I don’t know what’s going on with that, but it I can’t help but suspect it’s the product more of not bending on command and Pe’s insistence of instant gratification. Not committing to a brand new assessment doesn’t mean I believe the one I’m working with is RIGHT- it just means I need to let both things cook to find out which one comes out on top.

So how do we stop this mis-hearing of things? I don’t know, I guess we could either ask the other person to ‘do it differently’ (which as I explained, I personally am challenged at because it’s extraordinarily difficult for me to ‘memorize’ rules I don’t directly understand…so I certainly don’t expect anyone else to be able to) or just work on actually hearing it more for what it is ourselves. I prefer the latter method- of trying to understand how I’m mis-hearing.

[If anyone can dissect how "Why did you do that?" turns into "YOU’RE A HORRIBLE PERSON WHO DOES HORRIBLE UNICORN KILLING THINGS", I'd love to hear it. I don't like that I might come across that way- but simply saying 'don't ask why' is kinda too hard for me to use.]

 

[Southern Kross]

[MENTION=7842]Z Buck McFate[/MENTION] your post leaves me feeling seriously disillusioned...

 

[Z Buck McFate]

I had a feeling when I posted my least so variant brand of callousness might be bleeding through a bit too much. This thread has been like ‘the song that never ends’ since about 10 pages into it, and that brings a certain kind of exhaustion that makes it difficult to know when I’m being too callous. Maybe someone else can come along and give a lighter translation of what I said.

It’s just, there’s a certain kind of “me me me” subtext- or what *seems* to be- in the FP approach sometimes. Because the focus first and foremost seems to be one’s own story and the immediate moment- at least more than for FJs. It’s not that the individual isn’t important- it’s just that we work that out afterward in a very lengthy internal process, one that is so vague it’s hard to talk about but it's constantly going on. I know how I feel about things- just not right away- and I think it’s important for others to know how they feel about things too. I just don’t understand this ‘talking about it right away’ stuff.

I was trying to get at *why* it looks like ‘playing stupid’ or why it looks like manipulation, basically. Because it doesn’t occur to us to present our immediate impressions of our own story- and instead we present immediate impressions of ‘shared story’- it’s hard not to see someone present their own immediate impressions of their own story as trying to ‘guide’ the shared story in a really self absorbed way. But understanding all this better sheds light on the extent to which it *isn’t* someone trying to pass off “Me me me” as the ‘shared story’- that it’s simply presenting immediate impressions?

I’m really hoping someone else can maybe say this in a less harsh way.

 

[Winds of Thor]

i am just finding it very curious:

For the INFPs to a lesser extent, because you somehow wouldn't expect that from Fi dom's (edit: yes, i do realize the irony).

for the INFJs because so many of them where all pissed about how the many of the INFPs here (and later me as well) were making generalizations based on specific INFJs from their respective lives, and now many of the same INFJs are doing the same (given that the INFJs in their respective lives are themselves).

and honestly, if i caught an ENTP doing that...

Interesting point. So why is it the INFJ might seem like 'subject deflection' is a switched-to mode?

 

[Eilonwy]

I'm starting to think of this thread as a session of marriage counseling where the counselor is out of the room for long periods of time.

Partner A: Tell me what bugs you about me.
Partner B: You want to know what bugs me about you? Here you go.

Partner A: Explains and defends.
Partner B: Explains and defends back.

Next door neighbor: I have issues with Partner A, too. Let me into this discussion.

Partner A: Wow. Explains and defends.
Partner B: Double wow. Explains and defends.

Counselor: Small piece of insight.

Partner A: Oh, I get what B is feeling!
Partner B: Oh, I get what A is saying!

A few more neighbors: Some defend/explain A, some defend/explain B.

Partner A: Spaghetti.
Partner B: Spaghetti? Unicorns!

Partner A: Unicorns? Explains and defends.
Partner B: Explains and defends.

Next door neighbor: Blah, blah, blah.

Counselor: Stuff.

Partner A: More explaining and defending. Ad infinitum.
Partner B: More explaining and defending. Ad infinitum.

Partner A:
Partner B:


What would a marriage counselor suggest to break the stalemate and get each side to see the other's POV without hurting feelings even more than they have been?

 

[Society]

We're speaking of ourselves as representatives of our type.

wait.. so what if it was my exwife doing that? or [MENTION=6561]OrangeAppled[/MENTION] family member? or [MENTION=6037]Craic[/MENTION] friend's ex? or even the infamous tunnel-visioned other INFJs from [MENTION=7842]Z Buck McFate[/MENTION] life?

would they get the honor of doing that? how would it make you feel if they did?

 

[Fidelia]

The thing here is that it only applies to a specific situation. Remember us talking about checking on people's credibility first? I feel like I have enough history with certain people on here to comfortably say that we react with similar impressions. I would not say that I can speak for all INFJs everywhere, but as new people come in and either agree or disagree, I keep refining my idea of what is more universal, and what is more individual (or a particular flavour of INFJ, perhaps influenced by enneagram). For example, I really don't identify with the INFJs that feel uncomfortable and put on the spot by people dropping by their house. I like that sort of thing. However, I've met enough of them to understand they comprise a certain subset of INFJs. A 4w5 sp INFJ will seem different than a 1w2 so INFJ.