[MBTI General] Most Submissive MBTI Type ?

[Doctor Cringelord]

ISFJ boys love to crawl around on their hands and knees and serve as human chairs for their ENTJ girlfriends.

 

[JClassic]

She, as in one. Just because she can spot a lie a mile away does not mean INFJs can spot a lie a mile away.

Well according to a few sources online, this is the INFJ's natural ability to see through the B.S.

 

[Starry]

As an ENFP, I generally try to avoid situations in which someone creates an interaction that reveals who is going to be submissive. I do, however, know several Fi users (especially ENFP and INFP, myself included) that will be submissive in most matters unless it comes in conflict with something that matters to them. The conflict just isn't worth it otherwise. I know there's a whole discussion a few pages back about how being agreeable isn't the same thing as being submissive. To me, being agreeable is how I am submissive. I feel like a heel if I go through all the bother of proving I'm right about something that isn't going to matter in 24 hours.

I feel like I'm taking fuckin crazy pills here.



So Hank...you're going to have to forgive me in that I've grown tired of seeing/hearing others characterize NFPs as submissive (which may in fact be trending I've seen this characterization so often lately #SubmissiveNFP) so to see one of my own say something like "I...know several Fi users (especially ENFP and INFP, myself included) that will be submissive in most matters"... No. I'm ready to talk a little bit about this now haha.



sub·mis·sive
səbˈmisiv
adjective
1.
ready to conform to an authority or the will of others.


^^Unlike you, every young INTJ male that has ever existed and a significant slice of the rest of the world's population... I have never, ever encountered a submissive Fi user. Another thing I've never encountered...? People that say things like "I know dude! it's so weird right? I mean, it's like... the very definition of submission contradicts everything they say about the nature of introverted feeling...and yet I know hundreds if not thousands of submissive Fi doms and auxs...mostly chicks. Is it possible I'm not seeing things correctly and something else is going on?"



When I think of dominance and submission...I can't help but expand the lens and look at the *big picture* (totally Hank)
hierarchy, order, system, efficiency, structure, survival, dependency, safety, protection...

While there are exceptions to every rule...most of the people I know with ^these concerns...most of the people I know with actual dominant and submissive characteristics belong to the family Je.


I think Hank you must expand your vocabulary...don't be lazy No, your understanding of submissive is off. You can't really be submissive "until it matters". Submission says "Even when it matters a shit-ton I will assume you know better. I'm going to trust your judgment over and above my own (like a machine for this ultimate purpose.)" I think what you describe would be considered deference...maybe?


I think most of the submissive NFPs unicorn cases can be explained by mistypes and behavioral misreads. Or for Hank...try these words.


in·dif·fer·ent
inˈdif(ə)rənt/
adjective
1.
having no particular interest or sympathy; unconcerned.


de·tached
dəˈtaCHt/
adjective
1.
separate or disconnected


un·com·mit·ted
ˌənkəˈmitid/
adjective
1.
not committed to a cause, activity, etc.


ca·su·al
ˈkaZHo͞oəl/
adjective
1.
relaxed and unconcerned.

 

[Yama]

ISFJ boys love to crawl around on their hands and knees and serve as human chairs for their ENTJ girlfriends.

Shit. When did you install all these cameras in my house? I didn't think anyone was going to see that.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

Shit. When did you install all these cameras in my house? I didn't think anyone was going to see that.

I'm surprised your ENTJ girlfriend didn't know about the cameras. Or did she?

 

[Hank]

[a lot of stuff]

Hoo boy. Sorry, didn't mean to misrepresent Fi. I see from your post that I was wrong on the definition of submission.

Please, educate me (and I'm not saying that to be snarky--I'm genuinely curious, and I am still learning about cognitive functions.) Why would an Fe user like ISFJs be submissive, then? What is the difference between values held by Fi and values held by Fe that would allow Fe users to be submissive where Fi users normally wouldn't be?

EDIT: On second thought... Yeah, your post does makes sense. Under that definition, I would agree that Fi users can't be submissive.

 

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

Because Fe users want to serve and please others.

An Fi user will be sub because of an internal sense of harmony or value which intrinsically pleases them, and an Fe user will sub solely for the purpose of pleasing their mate (which in turn pleases them).



I think I prefer a Ti/Fi sub personally because being dom for me is not so much about being pleased, but serving a function to better someone. It pleases me not to be pleased by them (or that they want to please me) but more because I am breaking out the bad in them and rebuilding them in a better way....Or helping them to achieve a state of improvement they desire to achieve. Basically improving them somehow that they know needs improving.

And if I am sub to someone, they will undoubtedly like that I genuinely love them and want to please them. It won't be as much about my betterment, but about their superiority.

 

[Hank]

That description of Fe makes sense. Thank you.

(There was originally more to this post, but then I reread Starry's post and realized (s)he had already addressed what I was going to ask.)

 

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

my pleasure

 

[Cellmold]

Was going to say inb4 ISFJ, but I'm too late.

 

[Jaguar]

Well according to a few sources online, this is the INFJ's natural ability to see through the B.S.

And according to a few sources online, God exists and can pass judgment on you. Were you to read online that Oprah Winfrey gave birth to an alien baby, would you perceive it as truth?

 

[PhilipTheStone]

ISTJ are not really submissive in my experience. The male ones can be a pain in the ass in my opinion. They are quiet but when they do talk it is because they are telling you what to do.

 

[Starry]

Hoo boy. Sorry, didn't mean to misrepresent Fi. I see from your post that I was wrong on the definition of submission.

Please, educate me (and I'm not saying that to be snarky--I'm genuinely curious, and I am still learning about cognitive functions.) Why would an Fe user like ISFJs be submissive, then? What is the difference between values held by Fi and values held by Fe that would allow Fe users to be submissive where Fi users normally wouldn't be?

EDIT: On second thought... Yeah, your post does makes sense. Under that definition, I would agree that Fi users can't be submissive.

I corrected you to save myself from a night of heavy drinking (okay I confess I cannot tolerate alcohol). And yet it's so obvious to me how we're on the same exact page. This is something neither one of us is truly wired to readily understand. Like, what you were describing as "submission" could be likened to something as mundane as "choosing your battles". And yet you could still pick-up on a degree of personal discomfort in your sentiments for being put into a position where you ended-up sacrificing whatever it was you decided "mattered less" than the peace.

Submission is something that actually causes me anxiety to consider...it's that alien to me...and so I'm just going to try and wrap this up rather quickly here haha. But I think the key...or what I believe for us are "the missing links"...is that for submissive (and dominant) people...this is something that is desirable...something that the individual feels good about/takes pride in...and actively seeks. Good luck squeezing Fi into that haha (for fun check-out the Fi Rant thread...where all the submissive NFPs won't submit if their lives depended on it.)

 

[Arise.N.Key]

You say submissive not "passive" so that's what I will answer. Submission isn't based on anything relating to MBTI or cognitive function. Being generic in my response we all submit to others in the areas they know better, this is just acknowledging and yielding to their knowledge. Of course there are people stubborn beyond their own best interest and some types are more prone to this but that isn't want you're asking about.

I am a Dom and can give the perspective from that side and what I look for in a submissive. For me it mostly comes down to the motives that I look for, in a healthy Dom/sub dynamic it's an "exchange". So I look for a submissive that seeks a strong, safe, unconditional (love, acceptance, support), stable, self aware, attentive partner they can feel completely safe being totally exposed and vulnerable with and just let go. In my experience I'm far more likely to find that in the more assertive types, ENTJ, INTP, INTJ, ENTP, and so on. There are types like ISFJ, INFP that as a rule are too passive for me or wanting a partner to fill a void and take care of them which isn't a style that works for me. There are also types like the INFJ which I would never consider as a sub, they can't really lead or follow and seem to be super conflicted being either which paradoxically leaves them being neither and that doesn't work for me as there's no room for the "exchange" I need. I'm not condemning that as it seems to serve them well in many aspects of life but they aren't exactly known for their high level of saticfation in relationships and I think this is a huge part of why.

Do you feel that ESTJ personalities would be successful as subs?

 

[Evo]

In my experience, the ISFJs I know, are the most comfortable with being receptive. It seems like its extremely natural for them.

I associate needing a certain amount of receptivity with being submissive.

I could even see ISFXs in general being the most natural and easily admitting they're submissive.

 

[Samvega]

Do you feel that ESTJ personalities would be successful as subs?

That doesn't really work well with terms like "successful", this is about getting needs met in healthy ways based on both partners needs. If you have a need and your partner has a need and you can create a symbiosis from those needs you have been successful. I like a warrior princess, I don't like timid women for long term partners so for me to create the symbiosis I would want requires a different partner than say somebody who wanted more influence over things like their partners attire and so on. Just do what's natural for you and be open about your needs, when you find the right partner/match that's all it will take and the successful part will fall into place.

 

[CitizenErased]

In my opinion, all ISFPs I know yield to others that have a stronger personality.

I also voted INFPs because sometimes they give the impression of making efforts to be appreciated, even if it means doing/accepting things they don't quite agree with. But maybe those are just the ones I know, it's difficult to label a whole group of people based on another 4-letter label.

 

[supersleuth]

Absolutely ISFJs.

 

[Yama]

Why does this thread keep coming back

 

[fetus]

Why does this thread keep coming back

Let's all vote ESTP to fuck up the results!