damaged feeler?

[SkyWalker]

I (male 31) had a date yesterday with a pretty hot 22-year old girl. She is a Feeler and kind of histrionic/theatrical, not just in the way she acts, but also even in the way she dresses (provocative).

After arriving with her in a restaurant and saying my name for the reservation: I asked the waiter to give us a certain better table. The waiter told me that that particular table was probably reserved, but he'll try for us. Then he helped someone behind us in line to a table first, and we waited a few minutes. But then when he came back: He *again* helped someone behind us to a table. That was kind of weird, I have to agree!

So I started thinking: "It probably takes him a lot of time to arrange the table for us, he can't help me in peace if there is annoying people waiting, the waiter is probably sensitive to people so thats why he's doing that, my turn will come and he will help me. It is my own problem that i asked for this special table, or i would have been helped by now just like the others. Which was totally true"

But she started feeling: "I feel neglected! We were first! I am not used to waiting! I am too good for this! etc". So all of a sudden she changed into a monster and some really nasty stuff came out of her mouth. Even people sitting at tables turning their head to see what is going on. (Which had the effect of the waiter helping us immediately BTW, but which made me think that "I was sure that the waiter would secretly spit in our food now before serving it to us")

I know she's not a thinker, she really does NOT think. (She's just hot ).
She is a feeler for sure. And she did not leave her options open for perception, like taking in more information before acting, she judged straight away with her feeling and took action fast

My question to you guys:
- How would you type her with this limited information? (assuming what i say is true)
- Is this a damaged feeler? How could this have been damaged?
- Opinions on how her mechanism works?

 

[The Gopher]

hey man with all that info she better not read this... because she probably is paranoid to.

Just going with intuition though some sort of EXFJ. as most introverts won't speak out like that.

 

[SkyWalker]

ESFJ probably

but I was also thinking about ESFP (maybe she's not such a judger normally)

 

[Bird]

I am a damaged feeler and I am nothing like that.

 

[cheese]

She sounds spoilt, really, and like she's internalised all the marketing cliches make-up commercials use to sell their products (mainly by harping on their self-worth). Standard idiocy brought about by coddling, immaturity and lack of experience/reflection. I'm basing this on very little info though. Not necessarily a damaged Feeler thing, just a dumbass thing.

 

[SpaceYeti]

Or a woman thing...



Am I just kidding? Am I not? Shall I now be pummeled by many feminine hands?

 

[EyeSeeCold]

Or maybe she was just hungry and tired of waiting?

 

[SpaceYeti]

Impossible. Women eat before they go on dates to avoid looking like a pig during the date.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

My god, I've never thought of that.

 

[Auburn]

There's been an increasing amount of hostility toward women here lately....

 

[Taniwha]

My mind is screaming ESFJ, because that's what my mother is like...

 

[alphaxys]

Impossible. Women eat before they go on dates to avoid looking like a pig during the date.

You've got to be kidding me. Gents, ignore the sullen yeti in the corner. He's just projecting.

Though, any INTP worth their salt would be able to deduce this on their own, I think.

 

[Taniwha]

Impossible. Women eat before they go on dates to avoid looking like a pig during the date.

I never thought of doing that...

I'll remember that in the future so I don't look like a pig.

 

[Zero]

It's impossible to type someone by a mood swing or supposed emotional disorder.

It's not unnatural for someone to want to be seated... I know ESTs who'd do the exact same thing. They DO NOT get pushed around by other people.

I never thought of doing that...

I'll remember that in the future so I don't look like a pig.

F*** that.

If a man is so delicate he can't stand me eating with my fingers he can go home and stick a *beep* up his ***.

There's been an increasing amount of hostility toward women here lately....

Really? And here I thought it was normal for patriarchy society.

 

[Cognisant]

Really? And here I thought it was normal for patriarchy society.

Lol.

Btw, I'm not laughing with you.

 

[Zero]

That means nothing. Are you saying you're laughing at me?

That doesn't make sense. I suppose you're just saying that you don't respect me or what I say in the slightest and for some reason feel compelled to make it obvious through your "sarcasm."

The comment I made in itself doesn't strike me as unusual. It's sarcastic, but it's an obvious reference, so I don't know why you'd actually be laughing at it or me in humored way, especially considering you didn't explain the flaw you found (which people often do when they laugh at a flaw).

So you're probably not laughing at all, but find me irritating for some reason. Unless you actually want to make a coherent point, get over it.

 

[ProxyAmenRa]

F*** that.

If a man is so delicate he can't stand me eating with my fingers he can go home and stick a *beep* up his ***.

The world would be a better place if more people had this attitude.

 

[Zero]

The world would be a better place if more people had this attitude.

Embrace you wild side! Away with forks and spoons!

 

[nemo]

I love your attitude, Zero!

@OP: That sounds like what my mum would do, and she's ISFJ. You could probably guess xxFJ, maybe xSFJ. Iono. Look at other traits, characteristics, thinking patterns - it's a bit hard to type with just one action!

 

[CoryJames]

Point #1 Hunger triumphs all.

Point #2 Courtesy and respect, alphaxys, would say that a very new user like yourself, even if you were present for a limited time in the past, should be a bit more respectful to a more seasoned user like Yeti. I am not saying you have to agree, but disagree based on logic and do not try to insult him outright.

Point #3 For some reason these arguments frustrate me. Zero, as much as I am willing to admit that some men are pigs, not all, very few in fact, are out to subordinate women. The majority of the stereotypes and forces that "opress" (and I use that word VERY lightly) women and girls in our society, and I am speaking for the US alone, are implemented and maintained by your fellow women.

 

[Zero]

Who's research and analysis are you reading?

It's not about men being pigs, it's about a system that's twists both and then sets them against eachother. Or does it just so happen that the media likes to talk about murders of women usually via men for shock value? And the images for both are totally ridiculous.

BTW I recently read [his] book. I think my non-fiction issues reading is going to be narrowed to sociology from now on. Memoirs + social issues = I need a bottle of vodka.

 

[CoryJames]

Anything the media talks about it for shock value. They want the biggest reaction from their news so people return to them for "information". More viewers, higher prices for advertisement, more sales, more cashmoney. It is a business, not a public service, hence why it isn't funded by taxes. It is all about profit. Trust me, I go to a prominent business school haha.

 

[shoeless]

i starve myself before i go out to a restaurant so i can eat more.

i don't give a fuck if i'm on a date or if i'm eating with the pope. if i have the opportunity to eat good food for once, i'm going to eat it, dammit.

 

[CoryJames]

And the...VAST majority of murders are committed by men, it would make sense that women being murdered were usually murdered by men...are you implying that women are murdering men in some sort of misappropriated attempt to maintain a patriarchal society? Trimming the opposition down a bit?

My statement wasn't saying that men don't do bad things to women. They do. Just as men do bad things to other men, and women do bad things to men, and to other women. I was simply trying to say that the majority of...systems, for lack of a better word, or tendencies....that keep women "down" or influence their behavior or societies as wholes' opinions of them are instituted and maintained by other women (not consciously or as part of a conspiracy or anything...just clarifying because my word choice may imply that).

 

[CoryJames]

i starve myself before i go out to a restaurant so i can eat more.

i don't give a fuck if i'm on a date or if i'm eating with the pope. if i have the opportunity to eat good food for once, i'm going to eat it, dammit.

Especially if you are on a date. If the guy is any good he will pay...or at least offer to do so. I fear that my mention of chivalry may rile up Zero a bit more...

 

[PINT]

It seems more like J behavior than F behavior to me.

Aren't J's more likely than P's to be certain they're right, and boldly proclaim it to the world?

Maybe she just "felt" she was right or maybe she gave it some logical thought and could explain her reasoning if asked - but by God, she was absolutely convinced she was RIGHT.

 

[Zero]

CoryJames, as nice as your commentary on the subject is, could you answer my first question:

Who are your sources? *It's not like I'm asking for a bibliography. Just who or what told you the fact of oppression or apparent lack there of as you know it? One good source would be fine.

I added a link to what I recently read.

 

[CoryJames]

I do believe there is oppression. My sources are living at prep school for the last 5 years in communities of less than 400 people, and thus having knowledge of literally every stitch of gossip, you couldn't avoid it, and having several close female friends and discussing the subject with them, in depth, as societal tendencies were something of interest to me since I had never really bothered to understand them before. Also, coming across articles online. I will admit I am a bit of a pitiless person and get frustrated when people cry poor me and yet they bring their troubles upon themselves. It is something I have looked into. I'm sure I could go search google and find a link to support my claim, if you'd like, just as you could go find one to support yours.

But let's use a common example as a toy. Body image. One of the biggest topics of the feminist/feminist sympathetic agenda. Do you believe it is men that instilled this "NEED" to be thin? Or was it women. Because I know from my male friends that they'd be happy for attention from/physical relations with any girl who isn't hideous or abnormally overweight. Who are the people in junior high/high school who are the most cruel to girls about their body? Is it guys, or other girls?

What about sexual promiscuity? Who are the first ones to cry "slut"? A guy, or a girl?

In my personal experience, the most, if not all of this cruelty comes from girls. Maybe my experiences are atypical as I went to a very small high schools. Then again, I am in college now, and not much has changed. When I am sitting talking with my friends about a girl I hooked up with, my guy friends responded with the like of "cool" or "nice", yet Christina said from up on the bed "ew she is such a slut".

Yes, sometimes the rugby team will mess with a guy if he hooks up with a really unattractive girl when he got shitfaced and be like "oh she is gross", but I feel like this goes both ways between genders, with girls calling guys gross or manwhores...

 

[CoryJames]

The one thing I fully agree with is that we do have a very masculine oriented language, but that is not really conscious oppression or attack of equality. We are just sort of indoctrinated into it. I never even realized it until it was pointed out to me.

 

[Zero]

You're looking at individuals. Men and women are both mostly burdened by their own gender when being socially shaped.

Males are more likely to be aggressive with males and females with females as far as social shaping. This is a lot bigger, it has to do with all the lies that males and females are both being taught. Females end up suffering the most from the system, but everyone participates in it unknowingly and IMO (from what I read of his book) suffers from it.

Males are in submission to other males and into submission of males in general are females. Men are the "bread winners" they are the majority of top positions in the public atmosphere, which limits females' ability in the public sphere. Women have to worry about how they dress, act, ignore sexist comments/jokes and harassment if they want to climb the cooperate ladder and at the end of the day they get passed up for promotions. All over the internet people make comments like, "Why isn't she in the kitchen?" It's meant to be a joke, but jokes are usually revealing of how people actually feel/think about it. The fact that it's a well known and received joke perpetuates the normalcy of it.

The conditioning done to males leaves them the most paradoxical group, both the privileged and the most suicidal. In a milder sense, it's like what we see happen to super stars who start to lose popularity. Males are conditioned to think they should always be controlled, dominating and cool headed. They are conditioned to look at Super man and try to live up to unrealistic images that encourage them to detach from themselves and reality. But males are made to think they should be a single importance among "others." This ends up making them fragile, because they become too disconnected and constantly need re-affirmation of their masculinity and/or existence. They are self absorbed while females are self-conscious and are trained to take care of the male ego, which is a monstrous creation in the first place...

I wouldn't be able to go through the whole system as Johnson explains it. He does it well and carefully.

Sometimes the way he puts it is pretty funny... Many times he just says it like it is and compares it to stereotypes and assumptions. But then he goes onto explain that it's a complicated system. I really can't do it much justice in a post.

---
From a literary perspective, Language is Culture. Our sayings, our assumptions, our entire sense of identity is wrapped up in it. Words can have the same literal meanings, but have different implications, they can be seen as negative or positive. I'm trying to remember the African writer who wrote about the languages of African literature. I'm pretty sure his article was called The Language of African Literature.

Also, I didn't realize I pointed it out at all... Hmm

 

[CoryJames]

You didn't. I learned it in a class.

What you implied by what you said/quoted, women participate just as much as men in the controlling arena, and I still feel what I said is true, women are to more cruel and controlling of other women. They are the ones who first cry slut and fat and whatnot.

 

[Zero]

I can't remember much from my gender studies class years ago, but I think around here I still have papers from it.

I liked the larger take Johnson had on the subject, because it seemed to explain why the system is still referred to, why there are still issues, why the core of the problem still exists. Though I suppose looking from that distance over time and culture and awareness, his solution was somewhat morbid. He basically came to the conclusion that new generations would bring about new societies. I guess nothing is revolutionary about that, but it does imply that the old would have to be gone or removed from authority first. He wrote that people now can plant the seeds for it, even if the change is ultimately gradual.

I'm disappointed I won't see the society that replaces this one. I wonder how it will be better and if it could be worse, considering how we have developed...

 

[ProxyAmenRa]

There are people with certain personalities in society who perceive the social norms and cultural rituals of society and make the propagating of their perception paramount. They aspire to positions of authority. Once obtaining authority they enact their policy of imposition. Now we are seeing the ramifications of this in this thread. The may point of contention is not the fact that people try to impose ideals on others but it is either genders perception of each gender's methods of doing so. It has been well documented that males and females have different modes of communication and administering behavioural conformity adheres to such modes of communication.

A male within a group must face an audience of one's piers and provide justification of one's actions in the face of persecution. Beta makes typically don't face this because they normally fall in line with the alpha. However, alpha and omega males typically face the firing squad and must provide evidence of their masculinity and by inference their ability to make decisions. Decision makers must regularly deal with existential threats to their position of authority or the group.


Conversely, a female within a group must face a subset of smaller groups with tight relationships that are built on trust and mutual exchanges of information. They tend to pick each other apart slowly, of course, using information that was secretly shared under the guise of trust and forming a relationship. Cory must had observed this to make such comments and to a male such behaviour seems very vindictive.

Conflict of perception arises when a member from either gender is trying to attain positions of responsibility or authority in a field dominated by the opposite gender. A woman dealing with power plays with a male hierarchy will obviously face opposition that will use the male mode of communication. This is such that they will face sexist comments. The comments target the person's worth of character. However, the same still applies when male is facing the ordeals. I know have I have received harassments about all sorts of crap during power plays but the best and most effective method of dealing with it is to shrug it off or respond with equal or greater magnitude. However, physical or verbal aggression does not bode well.

Comments about one's masculinity or femininity in regards to adhering to social and cultural norms is simply a low form of the power play manifesting generally wielded by the intellectually disabled. Further more, independently minded individuals will have to face such trials every now and then. As for the individuals in society that have a fetish for propagating social and cultural norms and enforcing preconceived notions of gender identity they are in a power play of their own attempting to enforce a pre-existing power structure or their own.

 

[Bird]

Impossible. Women eat before they go on dates to avoid looking like a pig during the date.

Actually, the only time I usually accept dates
is when I'm too broke to buy groceries and
haven't eaten in a few days.

 

[alphaxys]

Point #1 Hunger triumphs all.

Point #2 Courtesy and respect, alphaxys, would say that a very new user like yourself, even if you were present for a limited time in the past, should be a bit more respectful to a more seasoned user like Yeti. I am not saying you have to agree, but disagree based on logic and do not try to insult him outright.

Point #3 For some reason these arguments frustrate me. Zero, as much as I am willing to admit that some men are pigs, not all, very few in fact, are out to subordinate women. The majority of the stereotypes and forces that "opress" (and I use that word VERY lightly) women and girls in our society, and I am speaking for the US alone, are implemented and maintained by your fellow women.

I hear you-- I take my words more lightly than they come across, forum etiquette is still a new deal for me.

 

[Zero]

Not all women are like that.

Anyway, I was going to say this has kind of detoured the thread, but look at the OPs post again, it's actually a perfect example.

This guy is dating a girl for a commodity, her body. She doesn't match up with him intellectually or emotionally, she's 9 years his junior for gods' sake. She dresses provocatively, which isn't a sign that she's a Feeler, it's a sign she likes the attention and probably doesn't have a lot of confidence otherwise.

Basically he doesn't understand how the types work, he says she doesn't think and is therefore a feeler, which isn't actually how it works.

But I suppose I should explain the body thing. Everyone knows that sex sells and apparently the only thing that is sexy or sexual is the female body. It's advertised everywhere and apparently so normal we're not suppose to take notice of it. For instance in the Second Iron Man, the opening scene has "sexy" backup dancers. They're just there to be stared at and are otherwise background decorations. Look up fantasy art in a google search. Thousands of pictures are of sexy women. These female bodies nameless commodities, a central decoration for the picture.

In contrast male bodies are not commodities, not even when men are being sexy. Usually if a man dresses sexually he's seen as a weirdo or a fag and portrayed as weird. Have you seen School of Rock? There's a guy in the competing band, I think the base player, who dresses sexually. For that, he's a freak as a person. When men act as stripper, they're performers and females don't expect them to stick around and please them in the back room after the show.

Men are supposedly sexy and powerful when they're dressed in tuxes. Hence it's their actual status (and money) that makes them powerful and sexy. That might not be the greatest thing, but at least it's not like their bodies are objects. At least making money shows a sign of competency.

In Johnson's book he also points out how a female can dress in the uniform of her superior (a tux or other male clothes). However a man can't wear a dress or feminine clothing without being seen as a fag or as a clown. Pretty clothing is a just a garnish or wrapper for the body commodity. It's kind of funny, makes me wish I had a harem so I could dress girls up in candy clothes and make a profit off the nameless.

 

[Cavallier]

You all do realize Yeti is trolling yes? Please stop derailing.

 

[Zero]

Haven't you been on INTPforum long enough to realize, if given the opportunity, we'll go off on tangents?

This thread should've been dead after ECS first comment.

Food- people eat it.
Being passed up for a table or ignored- irritating to most people.


*I'm done btw. My humanitarian mode just got passed up by Monopoly Woes.

 

[CoryJames]

Not all women are like that.

Anyway, I was going to say this has kind of detoured the thread, but look at the OPs post again, it's actually a perfect example.

This guy is dating a girl for a commodity, her body. She doesn't match up with him intellectually or emotionally, she's 9 years his junior for gods' sake. She dresses provocatively, which isn't a sign that she's a Feeler, it's a sign she likes the attention and probably doesn't have a lot of confidence otherwise.

Basically he doesn't understand how the types work, he says she doesn't think and is therefore a feeler, which isn't actually how it works.

But I suppose I should explain the body thing. Everyone knows that sex sells and apparently the only thing that is sexy or sexual is the female body. It's advertised everywhere and apparently so normal we're not suppose to take notice of it. For instance in the Second Iron Man, the opening scene has "sexy" backup dancers. They're just there to be stared at and are otherwise background decorations. Look up fantasy art in a google search. Thousands of pictures are of sexy women. These female bodies nameless commodities, a central decoration for the picture.

In contrast male bodies are not commodities, not even when men are being sexy. Usually if a man dresses sexually he's seen as a weirdo or a fag and portrayed as weird. Have you seen School of Rock? There's a guy in the competing band, I think the base player, who dresses sexually. For that, he's a freak as a person. When men act as stripper, they're performers and females don't expect them to stick around and please them in the back room after the show.

Men are supposedly sexy and powerful when they're dressed in tuxes. Hence it's their actual status (and money) that makes them powerful and sexy. That might not be the greatest thing, but at least it's not like their bodies are objects. At least making money shows a sign of competency.

In Johnson's book he also points out how a female can dress in the uniform of her superior (a tux or other male clothes). However a man can't wear a dress or feminine clothing without being seen as a fag or as a clown. Pretty clothing is a just a garnish or wrapper for the body commodity. It's kind of funny, makes me wish I had a harem so I could dress girls up in candy clothes and make a profit off the nameless.

Men can embody sex too you know. Have you ever been in an A&F store. This friday, my job was to stand at the front of the store with my shirt off to attract in customers, which I think I did in some sense. You try to make this an all woman issue, when it is not.

Sexy women are used to attract men to certain things. Namely, male products, which the advertisements of are meant to imply that if men purchase such products, sexy women will appear out of thin air and be attracted to them. Male geared movies, to get guys to go watch. Etc.

Sexy men are used to attract women to things in the same way. Such as A&F. If girls buy those clothes, sexy men will make out with them naked on a beach somewhere.

Sexy women are also used to attract women to things. Women's products, for one, which the advertisements of imply that if women use those products, they will also be sexy.

Same as sexy guys, like Armani cologne advertisements and old spice commercials. If men use these products, they will become those guys.


It is a two way street.

 

[Bird]

Sexy men are used to attract women to things in the same way. Such as A&F. If girls buy those clothes, sexy men will make out with them naked on a beach somewhere.

LOL what!?!

Get better female company (;

 

[cheese]

Men can embody sex too you know. Have you ever been in an A&F store. This friday, my job was to stand at the front of the store with my shirt off to attract in customers, which I think I did in some sense. You try to make this an all woman issue, when it is not.

Sexy women are used to attract men to certain things. Namely, male products, which the advertisements of are meant to imply that if men purchase such products, sexy women will appear out of thin air and be attracted to them. Male geared movies, to get guys to go watch. Etc.

Sexy men are used to attract women to things in the same way. Such as A&F. If girls buy those clothes, sexy men will make out with them naked on a beach somewhere.

Sexy women are also used to attract women to things. Women's products, for one, which the advertisements of imply that if women use those products, they will also be sexy.

Same as sexy guys, like Armani cologne advertisements and old spice commercials. If men use these products, they will become those guys.


It is a two way street.

*I think I've read in a few places that that sort of advertising, geared towards men (using men) and women (using men) is pretty recent, and a change in attitudes towards men's bodies, as they become more objectified, as the power of the sexes evens out in a somewhat counter-intuitive manner. (Sort of like Higgins, whose claim to equal treatment is that he treats everyone like dirt.)

*Can't provide any sources though.

 

[CoryJames]

I am confused as to what you are implying by that, but to clarify, that is in essence what the advertisements you see in the store are supposed to convey. Central office openly admits and tells the employees that they are supposed to advertise AF not as a brand of clothing but as a lifestyle, which is why it has been so successful. They aren't selling clothes, they are selling a value system and an idea.

 

[cheese]

What I meant was that, if the changes are indeed recent, it's quite likely they haven't occurred at an equal rate or in all places (even within the US), and that's simply advertising - it isn't sufficient indication that perception of males and their bodies has changed to become equivalent to perception of females and their bodies. In some areas the two-way street you spoke of may be practically one-way, still.

Basically I was pointing out there may be solid reasons for Zero's POV, since change is recent, uneven, and possibly isolated to certain aspects only.

 

[CoryJames]

Sorry my post was intended for bird, not you. what you said was clear.

 

[CoryJames]

However, in response, I feel that your information may be off. Men have been advertised to attract women and men for a long time. Maybe not with the sexuality of their body, (even though I still think thats been around a while), but at the very least with stature, clothing and power. Advertisements for men's products have long depicted attractive men in fine garb associated with the product, to attract men, and advertisements for women's products have depicted them associating/in a relationship with such men.

 

[Cavallier]

Haven't you been on INTPforum long enough to realize, if given the opportunity, we'll go off on tangents?

This thread should've been dead after ECS first comment.

It's true. And I've decided that I'm enjoying where this is going so I'll stop bitching now.

 

[Bird]

I was implying that if you associate and join the
company of females, or anyone, who thinks this
way, then I think you should find some friends
who may be just a smidgen more intelligent.

Your statement was absurd and ridiculous.

 

[CoryJames]

I was implying that if you associate and join the
company of females, or anyone, who thinks this
way, then I think you should find some friends
who may be just a smidgen more intelligent.

Your statement was absurd and ridiculous.

To people of our intellectual muscularity, with our tendencies to harrow things down to the basics and look at it objectively, I agree, it does seem that way.

However, that message is sent subliminally. People don't generally stop and go, hmm, I wonder why advertisements almost always use extremely attractive (in a classic, aesthetic, majority agreed upon sense) people? I wonder why A&F, a clothing brand, advertises nudity and sexual suggestion? I wonder why the Aqua De Gio ad in that magazine shows a European looking man with intense eyes and slicked back hair and an oiled up torso laying on a beach?

They simply see those things, see the name of the brand, and their brain makes a mental association. I don't believe the girls I mentioned consciously believe that by shopping at A&F means that muscular men with classically attractive facial bone structure will appear out of nowhere, take them to A&F land where people wake up for naked rugby at dawn on a misty moor and then naked beach volleyball for lunch followed by a long night of standing around in poses about to make out that stylishly cover up nudity. Their mind simply associates A&F with those things, which apparently appeal to a lot of people.

If I took your advice, Bird, and applied that logic to everything advertised, I fear I would have no friends. Almost everyone, myself included, whether we want to or not, are influenced by advertising. It isn't our fault, or because we are stupid. It is the way our mind works. People in marketing divisions these days have extensive experience in the field of psychology and they use it to their advantage.

 

[SkyWalker]

This guy is dating a girl for a commodity, her body. She doesn't match up with him intellectually or emotionally, she's 9 years his junior for gods' sake. She dresses provocatively, which isn't a sign that she's a Feeler, it's a sign she likes the attention and probably doesn't have a lot of confidence otherwise.

Basically he doesn't understand how the types work, he says she doesn't think and is therefore a feeler, which isn't actually how it works.

"Attention seeking is generally known to be a more female (or gay) thing to do, and coincidentally females (or gays) are also more likely to be feelers. hmmm maybe I am on to something?"

So, correct me if I am wrong, but isn't attention seeking more correlated with feelers anyway?

(or could you name a few thinkers that greatly suffer from attention seeking to prove me otherwise?)

BTW1: I love women, I have nothing against these fine creatures.

BTW2: Why do you presume I am shallow as in assuming that "he is probably only interested in her body"? Yes, a female has to have a nice body to attract me, but thats not all! much more is required! To find out if there is more I need to get to know them, for example, on a date.

*Men get attracted by looks mostly, women get attracted by social alpha behavior mostly, both are superfiscial and say nothing about the deeper inner life of a person, thats not big news, duh* no need to bitch about it, its nature, its therefore probably fair in the grand scheme of things somehow, just play the game along until you find somebody that can laugh about it with you, thats my plan anyway

 

[EyeSeeCold]

"Attention seeking is generally known to be a more female (or gay) thing to do, and coincidentally females (or gays) are also more likely to be feelers. hmmm maybe I am on to something?"

That's just sexist, you are proposing essence before existence, it is the other way around. Gays are not more likely to be feelers. Male feelers are more inclined to be confused about their sexuality, just like female thinkers.

So, correct me if I am wrong, but isn't attention seeking more correlated with feelers anyway?

(or could you name a few thinkers that greatly suffer from attention seeking to prove me otherwise?)

Aren't we all seeking intellectual stimulation?