Jump to content

[Non-asexuals Only] Some questions on MBTI and sexual preferences


mreid

[Non-asexuals Only] Some questions on MBTI and sexual preferences  

10 members have voted

  1. 1. What is your MBTI?

    • ISTJ
      0
    • ISTP
      0
    • ISFJ
      0
    • ISFP
      0
    • INFJ
      4
    • INFP
      1
    • INTJ
      1
    • INTP
      3
    • ESTP
      0
    • ESTJ
      1
    • ESFP
      0
    • ESFJ
      0
    • ENFP
      0
    • ENFJ
      0
    • ENTP
      0
    • ENTJ
      0
  2. 2. What is your ace partner's MBTI?

    • ISTJ
      3
    • ISTP
      0
    • ISFJ
      0
    • ISFP
      0
    • INFJ
      2
    • INFP
      0
    • INTJ
      1
    • INTP
      0
    • ESTP
      0
    • ESTJ
      0
    • ESFP
      0
    • ESFJ
      0
    • ENFP
      0
    • ENFJ
      0
    • ENTP
      0
    • ENTJ
      0
    • I don't know/ I don't have a partner
      4
  3. 3. What is your sexual orientation?

    • Heterosexual
      3
    • Homosexual
      3
    • Bisexual
      2
    • Pansexual
      2
  4. 4. Compared to you, is your partner psychologically more... (regardless of gender)

    • Feminine
      0
    • Masculine
      2
    • About the same
      5
    • I don't have a partner
      3
  5. 5. You feel more sexually attracted people who are psychologically...(regardless of gender)

    • More masculine than you
      2
    • More feminine than you
      1
    • About the same
      3
    • Both (on different people)
      4
  6. 6. If you replied "Both" in the previous question, what is your sexual orientation?

    • Heterosexual
      0
    • Bisexual
      2
    • Homosexual
      1
    • Pansexual
      2
    • Didn't reply "Both"
      5


Recommended Posts

So, is this a new theory separate from your other one?  I ask because many hetero females for example may be attracted to someone who is more masculine than them (because they're attracted to men) but that doesn't mean they want some jerk alpha male domineering type, lol. So while every hetero female may answer that they seek someone more masculine than them, and every hetero male may answer that he seeks someone more feminine than him.. that does not prove your other theory that hetero men want to be domineering alpha males in their relationships, or that hetero women want to be submissive doormats. Or is this a brand new theory that has nothing at all to do with your other thread? 

 

Also, I don't have an ace partner (anymore) and I know there are other non-aces here who don't have a partner now either. Maybe could you add an 'I don't have an ace partner' section for them? :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, mreid said:

I figured most people here would have an ace partner, since this is the forum for Partners and Alies and such, but you are right, I will add it.

 

I think you might be confusing me with someone else, because I never said that.

 

It's the same theory from many other threads. The theory is that there are two opposite forces in sexual attraction, feminine and masculine, gender irrelevant.

But those 'forces' have nothing to do with whether or not one wants to be dominated by/dominate their partner. Do I need to get quotes of yours again, because I will if necessary.

 

If you're going to change your story now and say that most hetero women seek masculinity of some kind or another in a partner, and most hetero men seek femininity of some kind or another in a partner, then you're 100% correct and literally everyone alive knows this. So.. you don't even need these polls.

 

9 minutes ago, mreid said:

I figured most people here would have an ace partner, since this is the forum for Partners and Alies and such, but you are right, I will add it.

Thanks :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

urgh I still can't answer despite the fact that you added the 'no ace partner' option. I've seen other people do this when some of the questions in the poll don't really apply to them, so I'll respond here instead (if you're at all interested in my answers which you probably aren't anyway, haha)

 

1 My MBTI is INFJ, though to be honest a LOT of people on the internet are INFJ or close to.

 

2 No ace partner, though  I only ever go for extreme introverts who do not enjoy social interaction and prefer to keep to themselves/be alone.

 

3 Sexual orientation is... complicated. To me, the outer gender of the person just doesn't matter, as it's their intellect/personality I am initially drawn to - then once that happens, they become an object of beauty to me regardless of their gender (even if they're non-human fantasy entities). I just say I'm 'sexual' without really a defining orientation. Pan would be closest, though that makes it sound like I want to bang anyone regardless of gender and it's not exactly like that for me. Fictosexual works though, haha :P

 

4 About the same-ish? The person I am currently interested in (a male-bodied person) is psychologically quite similar to me when it comes to gender, I guess?? Even though personality-wise he's very different. I'm not really masculine or really feminine psychologically, and the guy I'm into doesn't really have any 'hardcore' masculine traits mentally. He's also not 'girly' or anything. He's just.. himself.

 

5 Both, I guess? The above answer is the same for almost any person I've been drawn to, regardless of gender. I prefer someone to not be hardcore 'masculine' (the alpha type you were referring to in the other thread I guess) or hardcore feminine (extreme girly-girl). I am drawn to kindness though, and the ability to be sweet and gentle, even if said person is a warrior in armor or something. Intelligence though, the ability to think and to reason and to explore ideas, those are most important of all to me. If I was hetero, I'd be exclusively drawn to certain masculine traits (both physical and psychologically), I'm sure.. but even then, it would be too nuanced to sum up in the answer to one question.

 

6 Answered in previous question. Kind of Pan, but prefer to just go with Ficto lol.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, mreid said:

The way I understand feminility and masculinity is the stereotypical, biological way. Doesn't mean the woman has to be a doormat or that the guy has to be a jerk. Those are just exagerated examples of that dynamic. The other thread was about those examples.

But they're so much more nuanced than just.. muscles and a desire to drive cars (which is the stereotypical view of masculinity as a random example). The curve of a male's shoulders, the slant of a woman's neck, the roughness of a man's hands, the smell of woman compared to a man.. these are all very subtle differences that can draw a hetero couple together..but that doesn't mean all hetero women drawn to aspects of masculinity are looking for a gym buff or whatever though.

 

I'm just saying, if your theory is that hetero women are drawn to aspects of masculinity, and hetero men are drawn to aspects of femininity, then everyone knows that already. Though most couples these days still desire balance within that dynamic, equality, shared responsibility.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've given my thoughts on MBTI elsewhere so I won't delve into that again. Suffice to say I don't put much stock in it at all, plus there are two different lines of thinking as to how one determines their type (dichotomies like P vs. J, N vs. S, etc., and Jungian cognitive functions; google the latter if you're interested, it's complicated). Anywho. I'm very familiar with it and used to be obsessed with personality analysis (I think I first encountered MBTI when I was about nine or ten years old), but really don't think it has a whole lot of merit. The field of psychology agrees.

 

For what it's worth to you though, I almost always test as INTP. Have also sometimes tested INTJ, ISTJ and INFP, but INTP is what I generally go with. These are all common types found amongst members of online communities.

 

I have an asexual, er, "life partner" of sorts. I figured out that I'm gay and sexual (he's a guy), so. Our relationship once included romance and occasionally sex, but no longer does. We're best friends and continue to live together as family, and of course still love each other. I don't know what the future holds, but we're still partners in some sense. I literally have no fucking clue what his MBTI is, he's the most difficult person to type that I've ever come across. He's more outgoing than I am but still not highly extroverted. Perhaps a J more than a P, and probably F over T. I'm lost as far as S/N. Like I've never met anyone harder to type haha.

 

I also have an on-again-off-again significant connection with someone who's not asexual. I believe she's INFP.

 

I'm generally attracted to people who are neither strongly masculine nor feminine. That goes for platonic friendship connections as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, mreid said:

Ugh where is @Telecaster68? Answering Ficto's purple walls of text is not as entertaining without him around T_T

Probably asleep since he lives in the U.K.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, mreid said:

Ugh where is @Telecaster68? Answering Ficto's purple walls of text is not as entertaining without him around T_T

You didn't need to ANSWER the purple wall, it was just my response to the poll as your questions were very limited.

 

1 minute ago, mreid said:

That's what I have been trying to say from the beginning! Since my earlier threads! Jesus Christ Ficto. o.o

I'm not Jesus Christ, and no that's not at all what you've been saying. You've been trying to say it's about hetero women desiring an alpha male and alpha males desiring submissive females, and you said that hetero people who fall outside of that must be defective in some way.. then went on to stipulate that you can diagnose those who are defective, pretty much. Seriously, keep up with your own posts. Or do you make so many that you keep forgetting what you've said previously? I've caught you out doing that plenty of times before.

 

4 minutes ago, mreid said:

@CBC So? We have the same timezone. But I suppose at his age he needs to rest.

Some people do shit other than sit on AVEN all night, lol.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No need to be snarky. Just because you're not asleep at 2.00 am doesn't mean the majority of people in your timezone aren't. Grow up. Your attitude is unpleasant.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like threads getting locked either, you were the one who got personal and snarky. I answered your questions and then responded to your comment about Tele.

 

Anyways, I'm out. Carry on.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, mreid said:

That's what I have been trying to say from the beginning! Since my earlier threads! Jesus Christ Ficto. o.o

For clarification, what myself and others are taking issue with is the way you are automatically attributing 'masculine' as being dominant, and 'feminine' as being submissive - and claiming that if someone seeks a 'masculine' personality type, they themselves must be slightly submissive and vice-versa. However, masculinity and femininity are not synonyms for dominant or submissive. People are trying to explain to you that a hetero woman is almost guaranteed to be drawn to aspects of masculinity, but that does not mean in any way she is a submissive person who wishes to be dominated (and vice versa for the males).

 

Here are some quotes of yours, from your first few posts in the other thread:

 

On 9/13/2018 at 4:50 PM, mreid said:

but for the sake of this discussion let's consider the buff gym guy, domineering Mr Grey types, the popular jock stereotype and "patriarchal" types. Basically stereotypical alpha male types.

 

On 9/14/2018 at 4:14 AM, mreid said:

Yet, most women seem to be attracted to those types, or men woudn't feel the need to act in an alpha-male-ish way to seduce women.

 

On 9/14/2018 at 7:32 AM, mreid said:

I just gave that as an example to show that the majority of women are attracted to these types, which is undeniable that they are. They don't specifically tell me it's this type, but they imply it and I know the women in question well enough to know that was what they meant.

 

On 9/14/2018 at 10:55 AM, mreid said:

If I remember right, you said before that you are attracted to shy, feminine, sensitive guys. Could it be that your personality is a bit more on the masculine side? Maybe you like to be the dominant one in the relationship?

I wish you would just try to understand what other's are attempting to explain to you, instead of just ignoring everything that doesn't match your own personal theories.

 

7 minutes ago, CBC said:

you were the one who got personal and snarky.

Yes, that seems to be pretty common in this member's threads. I also am out.. kind of over explaining myself repeatedly in a hundred different ways only for them still to completely not understand what I'm saying.

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, mreid said:

Now you know exactly how I feel.

The difference is that people are understanding you, they're just not agreeing with you. Whereas you're just completely missing the point of what everyone else is saying. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get this. Maybe it's because I'm not female now... because I didn't find myself a manly man?

 

Am I het or hom? Do I pick the gender I  leave or the one I move towards?

 

I ain't wasting time on Myers Briggs but maybe you'd like my zodiac? Personality isn't binned, but there are more accepted measures? My big five scores high on openness.

 

But was there a theory? I missed it. Sorry. I hate the social construction of gender. Maybe I'll try being girly again after my voice drops.

Link to post
Share on other sites

'cause you're slow, or maybe sleep deprived? 🙃

 

But it's best not to tell subjects your theories, it spoils the experiment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Things can make sense even if they don't make sense to you personally, @mreid. I'm not gonna claim that Swahili or quantum physics make sense to me because I know bugger all about them, but they do to others. You seem to just dislike people not agreeing with you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sweet dreams.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, FictoVore. said:

My MBTI is INFJ, though to be honest a LOT of people on the internet are INFJ or close to.

They may or may not actually be (if there even is such a thing as an actual MBTI type). Thing is, a lot of answers to specific questions change with context. If you were asked whether you are someone who doesn't mind breaking laws, normally you'd be offended. At say a protest where an unjust law is being opposed, you'd be proud to call yourself that. This is an extreme example, but subtle mood changes can change subtle preferences.

 

Fact is, MOST people aren't this .... "polar" in their preferences and responses adapt to need of the situation. For example, context - if you are sitting alone with your laptop or mobile, you are less aware of how much you interact and more aware of how you spend a lot of time like this. Your awareness of one kind of input is dialled down in your perception.

 

There are countless people who get different MBTI types in response to questionnaires when they do them each time. Because these subtle differences in our mood are enough to throw our totals from one type into another. And yet, you are supposed to be one type for life.

 

It is pseudoscience and has no basis in observable human behavior or development. Heck even I was extraverted as a teenager. Now I'm rabidly intraverted by preference. But wait, I can have a crowd eating out of my hands even today. So... extraverted or intraverted? The test just doesn't have nuanced enough psychometrics to be any use.

 

I believe there are countless critiques on the internet without me writing one here, but overall, if someone is measuring personality, I'd suggest going with a better tool if at all a tool must be used. May simply be better to ask for specific behavior traits and corelate whem with the information related to asexual relationships.

Link to post
Share on other sites

please stay on topic and avoid personal attacks, call outs etc.

 

 

Iff,

moderator, sexual partners, friends & allies

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, anamikanon said:

They may or may not actually be (if there even is such a thing as an actual MBTI type). Thing is, a lot of answers to specific questions change with context. If you were asked whether you are someone who doesn't mind breaking laws, normally you'd be offended. At say a protest where an unjust law is being opposed, you'd be proud to call yourself that. This is an extreme example, but subtle mood changes can change subtle preferences.

 

Fact is, MOST people aren't this .... "polar" in their preferences and responses adapt to need of the situation. For example, context - if you are sitting alone with your laptop or mobile, you are less aware of how much you interact and more aware of how you spend a lot of time like this. Your awareness of one kind of input is dialled down in your perception.

 

There are countless people who get different MBTI types in response to questionnaires when they do them each time. Because these subtle differences in our mood are enough to throw our totals from one type into another. And yet, you are supposed to be one type for life.

 

It is pseudoscience and has no basis in observable human behavior or development. Heck even I was extraverted as a teenager. Now I'm rabidly intraverted by preference. But wait, I can have a crowd eating out of my hands even today. So... extraverted or intraverted? The test just doesn't have nuanced enough psychometrics to be any use.

 

I believe there are countless critiques on the internet without me writing one here, but overall, if someone is measuring personality, I'd suggest going with a better tool if at all a tool must be used. May simply be better to ask for specific behavior traits and corelate whem with the information related to asexual relationships.

You and I usually disagree on everything lol but I actually agree with you here completely and that's more what I was getting at with my comment (I was just trying to focus more on my issues/questions with the theory behind the poll). I should have been more clear, but what I meant is that when many individuals online take the test, they get INFJ or close continuously. I personally think the Myers Briggs tests are a load of twaddle anyway, just because individuals can answer however they feel at any give time, and a test can't actually sum up any individual human's entire personality, that would  be Impossible :P

 

I have continuously got INFJ personally, every time I've done the test, but that's just because I love public speaking (acting, narration, having a voice that people listen to.. posting publicly on AVEN but having great difficulty with PMs.. I feed off knowing many people can read/hear me. I'm very passionate about the causes I choose to stand for and will run myself to the bone to fight for them. I can't experience 'loneliness' because being alone is the only way I can truly be happy and energised!!) But at the same time, I can't stand interacting with humans. I have no friends, by choice - not even acquaintances - because I just can't be around people without going mad. I can't work outside the house, because I'd lose my mind, I can't even engage in PMs here for any length of time because they drain me rapidly. I'm at the perpetual 'hermit' end of introvert, utterly asocial, while still having a desire to use my voice publicly. Yet I'm also nothing like an INFJ as described in the summary sections of the polls, lol!! It's just the way one has to answer the questions, that's the result I get - because none of the other questions are accurate for me. Then the test also says it's the rarest type, yet often at least 30% or even more of the people responding to online polls say that's their result :P

 

So yes, the Myers Briggs tests are a load of twaddle if you ask me. I was just trying to focus more on my complaints about the theory behind the poll, or at least establish some kind of reasoning behind it that wasn't contradictory. Should have made myself clearer though. Thanks for calling me out so I could explain myself haha! 🍰

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, mreid said:

No, I wouldn't? It's just a question. I'd probably only be "offended" if I had something to hide.

It was an example, not a predictor of your actual replies.

 

5 hours ago, mreid said:

 No the MBIT is not 100% accurate, but it gives a good clue as to what a person's personality may be like in general terms.

That is the point I was making. It often doesn't. And particularly the more self-aware a person gets, the more their results tend to vary, because the nuances are very developed. So then it no longer is about if in Situation A, will you do W, X, Y or Z, because their mind will have sub-situations/conditions that would vary that response and what they replied would depend on which condition came to mind. On an idle Friday night, are you likely to go to the pub, stay at home, catch a movie or go for dinner? Anything from feeling hungry in the moment to how long it has been since you had some quiet time off your hectic life will dictate the reply. PARTICULARLY among stressed professionals (the majority of those I've seen go for this test). They may be super extraverted, but if they've been chasing targets, wooing clients, working round the clock for the past three months, a quiet evening will appear attractive.

 

5 hours ago, mreid said:

I could do that to, but I see no point in asking whether someone is introverted or extraverted or etc when they can just take the test and get a pretty accurate response. And as for their ace partners, I think it will be better to let them take the test by themselves instead of taking that sort of guesses.

You are confusing type with trait. Type is a classification. Trait is a specific quality - it is less likely to go wrong. Though self-assessment is not very reliable to begin with.

 

The objective of your survey is not very clear. Initially it appeared like you were trying to find corelations with MBTI types - which I said is a waste of time, because the MBTI is pseudoscience.

 

Now I'm not sure what you are looking for. Is it that you are looking for any corelation at all or something and aren't sure yourself? You'd do better with a mix of lifestyle, nurture and behavior questions. MBTI remains pseudoscience. Even if you were able to find something, you wouldn't be able to replicate it, because the MBTI itself is not reliable. It would be a waste of time.

 

Regardless, your experiment, your time. Would be interested in seeing if you found something interesting.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FictoVore. said:

I have no friends, by choice - not even acquaintances - because I just can't be around people without going mad. I can't work outside the house, because I'd lose my mind, I can't even engage in PMs here for any length of time because they drain me rapidly. I'm at the perpetual 'hermit' end of introvert, utterly asocial, while still having a desire to use my voice publicly. Yet I'm also nothing like an INFJ as described in the summary sections of the polls, lol!!

Here is a further mindfuck. Is introversion or extraversion decided by physical reaching out or turning in, or any preference for engagement or aversion? As in, by the act of seeking or avoiding contact, or the nature of the contact. Because, if you counted virtual interactions, then a lot of the INFJs go BANG into E. Like flat out opposite. Extensive, repeated, sustained interactions. You and me included. Now what? And yet the unwary would get bitten.

 

Now, with the awareness of seeking interactions online also being seeking interactions, would the INFJ survive?

 

But is it really engagement or actually a form of gatekeeping contact so that we have complete control on when we can ignore it, so we don't have to guard against it as bad as physical interactions? What if the contact is with people you know in real life, but on phone or internet most of the time? Does it count or not? What if you seek extensive contact limited in some way (phone, internet, morse code, wahtever) because that is all that is suitable/practical/possible for you? Is that you constantly seeking contact or lack of success makes you an introvert?

 

At this point, MBTI type tools become pretzels.

 

And this is just one aspect. You can do this with all four. I didn't, mostly because this forum is for asexuality and not psychology 😛

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, anamikanon said:

Here is a further mindfuck. Is introversion or extraversion decided by physical reaching out or turning in, or any preference for engagement or aversion? As in, by the act of seeking or avoiding contact, or the nature of the contact. Because, if you counted virtual interactions, then a lot of the INFJs go BANG into E. Like flat out opposite. You and me included. And yet the unwary would get bitten.

I've wondered about this often actually, haha. I know for me, the online contact is only 'do-able' if I'm in an online group setting so many people can absorb what it is that I have to say. Once it's one-on-one, I'm instantly drained and actually have to fight myself to continue to engage in PMs (which I usually can't do beyond maybe 3 messages.. and that's in a month or more mind you. It's like I can feel energy being literally pulled out of me when I try to talk with someone privately )Y_Y I can handle the occasional Skype call one-on-one, either getting a drunk or watching a movie or something. But I've only done that with two different people in the past two years, hah. But yeah, if just typing publicly in a forum counted, I'm a hardcore extrovert 8)

 

7 minutes ago, anamikanon said:

But is it really engagement or actually a form of gatekeeping contact so that we have complete control on when we can ignore it

That's one thing I love most about online contact.. I can just close the tab when I've had too much!

 

11 minutes ago, anamikanon said:

MBTI type tools become pretzels.

Related image

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, FictoVore. said:

But yeah, if just typing publicly in a forum counted, I'm a hardcore extrovert 8)

Would be like landing up at a pub to check out who wants to talk over a beer. The more, the merrier. Not very "Introvert" eh? ;) 

 

(and loads of people don't engage online at all other than work emails and such minimal contact. You and I aren't those people)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I felt my MBTI was about spot on.  It shouldn't be taken super seriously, much like any personality test.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was out, having fun with real physically present people in a physically existing bar, but it's nice to be missed. @mreidwas being a cheeky young whippet and deserves to be spanked. 

 

I entirely agree with @CBC about MBTI 'tests'. I think there's *some* evidence the full-on day long assessment done by qualified people has *some* use, but online questionnaires are about as robust as astrology. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kinky.

Link to post
Share on other sites

zGHQb4O.gif?2

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...