SJ's more: racist, homophobic?

[JansenDowel]

Is there actually a connection between dom introverted sensors and prejudice? Or am I just imagining things? I'm a gay guy wandering if I can use this to help decide if its safe to associate with a particular individuals.

 

[Reluctantly]

I'd ask them questions that relate to homosexuality and see what they say about it. Then you can gauge what is safe and what is not. Because it really depends on the individual, unless you want to subject this person to being a statistic, then you'd pretty much be right without going into detail.

 

[OrLevitate]

one day, gay gay, you will swallow the truth. prejudice is the justification of lines. lines are 2d. particular individuals, on the other hand, are infinite.

 

[JansenDowel]

I'd ask them questions that relate to homosexuality and see what they say about it. Then you can gauge what is safe and what is not. Because it really depends on the individual, unless you want to subject this person to being a statistic, then you'd pretty much be right without going into detail.

What's wrong with categories? It reduces the necessary mental effort to adjust to novel situations.
In either case, you are saying that introverted sensing really is associated with prejudice? I'm sorry if you feel i'm putting words in your mouth.

 

[JansenDowel]

one day, gay gay, you will swallow the truth. prejudice is the justification of lines. lines are 2d. particular individuals, on the other hand, are infinite.

Ok. Do you have an answer to my question?

 

[Hadoblado]

I don't think it would be a reliable measure. It'd be easier to spot homophobia itself than spot Si then make inference, even if there was a measurable effect.

 

[TheManBeyond]

euhm i dislike watching guys making out, i don't mind gayness tho
some Si here?

 

[Pizzabeak]

Ok. Do you have an answer to my question?

He did answer your question, you're just too sensor to interpret the comprehension

 

[Jennywocky]

I would treat people based on who they are, not what type category you can lump them into.... if only because by the time you figure out their type for certain, you'd already have figured out a long time ago their view on gays and whether you'd be "safe" around them.

I don't need to know what type someone is to determine whether or not they're a threat.

EDIT: Dammit, Hado sniped my answer 5 hours ago! I didn't know he had invented time travel!! (Sneaky, dude... but I'm not beaten yet!)

 

[Hadoblado]

I haven't invented it yet, but I will one day and I will have decided to endow my previous self with this ability retroactively. With this power I choose to just walk around in the past turning all posts I happen to agree with into long-winded plus-ones riddled with edits aimed at identifying their own redundancy.

I then choose to explain this to you while wrestling with time travel tenses crossing my fingers I've got it right but not really bothered enough to triplecheck.

 

[Jennywocky]

Oh, I see -- blaming your FUTURE self so that I can't call your CURRENT self on the carpet any more?

You are a worthy opponent in the Time Wars, but it won't help you if I (or my future self) go back and prevent mankind from evolving so that you never existed.


EDIT: As another comment to the OP, Si doms absorb as a starting point the environment they're raised in. They can change just like anyone else, we all are capable of change, but typically the mindset compares the current object to the known standard to determine its validity (which is one reason why ISTJs make great proofers / fact-checkers etc -- they learn the "standard" and are quick to see what veers from it); hence, they tend to absorb and promote the values they are raised in more than types that operate from other perspectives. Then again, if they're raised in open environments, that becomes the basic standard.

I would worry more about avoiding rigid folks of any type.

 

[BrainVessel]

SJ's actually have gaydars implanted in their brains at birth. You can run, but you can't hide.

...
No, but really. Like said above, you can't lump someone into a category and expect them to abide by it as if it's a law. It completely depends on the individual.

 

[Brontosaurie]

in an intolerant culture, yes. in a tolerant culture they will be defending equal rights. Si and especially Si-Te internalizes convention. they do whatever doesn't make a difference.

 

[StevenM]

I've run down SJ's in the past, but now I'm thinking I might have been skewed and incorrect in my personal judgements.


I've read an opinion somewhere, where Pi-dom's are very stuck and stubborn in the way they perceive things. Si's (perhaps) with them being a little more old-fashioned, there can be a correlation to being old-fashioned in their views, if they were brought up to be racist or homophobic.

SFJ's will feel what they have perceived as socially acceptable. STJ's will rationalize what they have perceived to be general known fact. I think these people rely on the general notions of the people they were more close to.

 

[Absurdity]

So you don't like it when people jump to conclusions about who you are as a person based purely on one dimension of your identity but you're wondering if you can do the exact same thing to them?

Craving a sense of certainty and the feeling of security that comes with it is dangerous regardless of your intentions or group affiliation. I don't see why it's wrong for one group and not for another.

 

[Cherry Cola]

My bet is people notice SJ's a fuck of a lot easier when their values differ from their own. SJ's whose social attitudes are like ones own aren't that easy to spot. You need to get in their heads first. You've probably already associated with a bunch of tolerant SJ's without knowing it.

That being said I still think intolerance is an SJ trait in a general sense, whatever the box they have trouble thinking outside of it. I've been in some progressive feministic discussion groups on facebook and it's amazing how many of these feminists manage to preach tolerance with a fundamentalist fervor that turns it on it's head, and it's obvious how few of them are actually thinking on their own. There's lots of groupthink and lots of shunning of any form of diffidence from norms.

 

[Jennywocky]

My bet is people notice SJ's a fuck of a lot easier when their values differ from their own. SJ's whose social attitudes are like ones own aren't that easy to spot. You need to get in their heads first. You've probably already associated with a bunch of tolerant SJ's without knowing it.

That being said I still think intolerance is an SJ trait in a general sense, whatever the box they have trouble thinking outside of it. I've been in some progressive feministic discussion groups on facebook and it's amazing how many of these feminists manage to preach tolerance with a fundamentalist fervor that turns it on it's head, and it's obvious how few of them are actually are thinking on their own. There's lots of groupthink and lots of shunning.

You just have to generalize far enough that you can recognize the same bullshit from other archetypes.

NTs do this kind of shit too, but we just do it on the basis of "rationality." If someone doesn't follow our particular rules of logic, we can be quick to mock, belittle, dismiss, and exclude them ... distrust the things they say. It just doesn't looking like "groupthink" because it has a veneer of independent thought, but in the end you're still excluding and dismissing some ideas and people without really taking the time to examine where they are coming from. I've seen it here before. I've been guilty of it sometimes myself.

And I can apply it to other type cateories as well.

 

[JansenDowel]

He did answer your question, you're just too sensor to interpret the comprehension

He made an implication which is hardly an answer.

 

[Pizzabeak]

You aren't smart or empathetic enough to feel what he's sayin, bro

 

[JansenDowel]

You aren't smart or empathetic enough to feel what he's sayin, bro

That lines are lazy and humans are deserving of more respect? Yeah, I get it. But that's not what I asked about.

 

[JansenDowel]

in an intolerant culture, yes. in a tolerant culture they will be defending equal rights. Si and especially Si-Te internalizes convention. they do whatever doesn't make a difference.

Thanks.

 

[scorpiomover]

Is there actually a connection between dom introverted sensors and prejudice? Or am I just imagining things? I'm a gay guy wandering if I can use this to help decide if its safe to associate with a particular individuals.

Si-doms are pretty traditional. If they happened to be raised in an openly homophobic community, then there's a good chance they would be. If they've been raised in a homo-supportive community, then they'll probably glare at you like you've just shot Bambi for even suggesting that they'd be homophobic, and would treat you like you've just contracted leprosy. Conventionality cuts both ways.

 

[Brontosaurie]

Thanks.

if you got something out of my post, you probably got it wrong.

 

[JansenDowel]

if you got something out of my post, you probably got it wrong.

When you said "they internalize convention", were you being sarcastic? Otherwise, that statement is very helpful.

 

[Brontosaurie]

When you said "they internalize convention", were you being sarcastic? Otherwise, that statement is very helpful.

no but it's just typology derivations, not actual real life psychology. so it's of little use.

 

[deadpixel]

no but it's just typology derivations, not actual real life psychology. so it's of little use.

I go by character and character alone, any other way would be ignorance. My SJ gf can be the opposite.

 

[Brontosaurie]

I go by character and character alone, any other way would be ignorance. My SJ gf can be the opposite.

i don't get it. what do you mean by character? as opposed to what?

 

[Cherry Cola]

I go by character and character alone, any other way would be ignorance. My SJ gf can be the opposite.

Okay so when you don't know the character of someone you go by nothing? Or do you presume to always be able to tell the character of someone without knowing them thoroughly?

Face it, you need to presume, to categorize and be ignorant to function in a social setting.

 

[deadpixel]

i don't get it. what do you mean by character? as opposed to what?

A persons character, how they carry themselves, how they act, how they behave, what their value system is comprised of, are they a good person or a shitty person? Is it the type of person that I can trust? Is it the type of person that I would want to be around?

Those are the things that matter to me and nothing more, I dont care about what your skin color is or what planet you are from.

 

[deadpixel]

Okay so when you don't know the character of someone you go by nothing? Or do you presume to always be able to tell the character of someone without knowing them thoroughly?

Face it, you need to presume, to categorize and be ignorant to function in a social setting.

... I dont judge anyone until I have gathered enough information to form an opinion.

 

[deadpixel]

Okay so when you don't know the character of someone you go by nothing? Or do you presume to always be able to tell the character of someone without knowing them thoroughly?

Face it, you need to presume, to categorize and be ignorant to function in a social setting.

Lets take you for example, I've gathered enough information about you to realize that you are the type of person that likes to wait around for someone to make a thread or post that has some kind of discrepancy in it and try to point it out so that you can feel like a cool guy. Not the kind of people I'm really into, that's why I hardly come on the forum anymore, seems like that's the only reason most people are on it, it gets very old very fast.

 

[Jennywocky]

Lets take you for example, I've gathered enough information about you to realize that you are the type of person that likes to wait around for someone to make a thread or post that has some kind of discrepancy in it and try to point it out

I think you can definitively say this much.

... so that you can feel like a cool guy.

That's where you are going out on a limb. I don't get the impression Cherry does it to be "cool" (whatever that means exactly), it seems something more intrinsic to what Cherry perceives and how stuff gets processed. If you're going to trivialize it to "being cool," it will lead you astray.

But I wanted to get back to your original comment here, which is:

I go by character and character alone, any other way would be ignorance. My SJ gf can be the opposite.

Yeah, while I think we're more complex than just going by "one thing alone" in reality (we often have currents of inclinations moving us about in the subconscious, nudging us), consciously I would rather evaluate a person by their behavior and character and ideas versus just dumping them in a box ("you gays" or "you conservatives" or "you rich people"). I think generalizations are hard to avoid mentally, because (1) we're absorbing messaging daily from a variety of sources and (2) we have had experiences that might suggest patterns, but I think ultimately we're better off even when that subtext comes to mind in giving individual people opportunities to be themselves versus representative of their subgroup.

I think Si is more inclined to use the past experience(s) as a basis for comparison to current observation; it's comparing to that standard of measurement as a conscious focus, so it can reduce ambiguity and know how to approach something via tried and established processes.

 

[Hadoblado]

CC = wetblanket diehard. Definitely needs to be put in his place. Preferably a box. In the ground.

 

[Cherry Cola]

Lets take you for example, I've gathered enough information about you to realize that you are the type of person that likes to wait around for someone to make a thread or post that has some kind of discrepancy in it and try to point it out so that you can feel like a cool guy. Not the kind of people I'm really into, that's why I hardly come on the forum anymore, seems like that's the only reason most people are on it, it gets very old very fast.

Eh, I don't wait around, I just browse and then when I see something that doesn't make sense to me I point that out and it isn't all about coolness. Wet blanket seems more accurate.

But okay I'm the one trying to act cool Mr "I go by character alone, I ain't the type to be prejudiced about people" notwithstanding the fact that basic psychology made it clear long that everyone categorizes people at first glance according to preconception.

 

[deadpixel]

Eh, I don't wait around, I just browse and then when I see something that doesn't make sense to me I point that out and it isn't all about coolness. Wet blanket seems more accurate.

But okay I'm the one trying to act cool Mr "I go by character alone, I ain't the type to be prejudiced about people" notwithstanding the fact that basic psychology made it clear long that everyone categorizes people at first glance according to preconception.

The thread was titled are SJ's more "racist and homophobic", racism or homosexuality refers to peoples judgement system based on someones race or sexual preference alone. My answer was no, I don't completely dismiss everything about who a person is based on those two things, My gf who is an SJ though is more inclined to do so. I was staying within the confines of the thread title without veering off into some retarded rant to try to make myself appear smart which really I believe most people perceive as arrogance, a style that most people here aren't accustomed to it seems.

I mean yeah if someone walks up to me and says "im a jihadist", that is everything I need to hear, I dont want to be anywhere near that person. But that is COMMON SENSE, something that "extreme intuitives" lack, so I excuse you for not understanding my point.

 

[Cherry Cola]

Yes, except what you wrote was: I go by character and character alone, any other way would be ignorance. My SJ gf can be the opposite

 

[deadpixel]

Yes, except what you wrote was: I go by character and character alone, any other way would be ignorance. My SJ gf can be the opposite

k

 

[Jennywocky]

CC = wetblanket diehard. Definitely needs to be put in his place. Preferably a box. In the ground.

Ooooh, like buried treasure!!!

Let's look for the buried treasure, papa!
Let's look for the treasure!

 

[JansenDowel]

no but it's just typology derivations, not actual real life psychology. so it's of little use.

Yes, I realize that. But MBTI is clearly getting something right. I'm unsure of its actual utility.

 

[J-man]

Would you consider it racism if someone was disgusted by a particular ethnic group, but never took on a stance of racism or maybe never consciously registered the pattern?

 

[JansenDowel]

Would you consider it racism if someone was disgusted by a particular ethnic group, but never took on a stance of racism or maybe never consciously registered the pattern?

No. Racism involves both prejudice AND discrimination. I don't think, strictly speaking, racism is immoral. But it does expose a degree of incompetence.

 

[lookslikeiwin]

I disagree. I know two ISFJs really well and an ISTJ.

One of the ISFJs is my father, and although he isn't in favor of gay marriage, he isn't weird or anything about it. Race isn't an issue in our household. I've had boyfriends of different races. My dad is also perfectly normal about talking to gay people, he just thinks it is wrong. But I mean, you wouldn't even know unless you asked or were a Christian (because then he would feel like he should say something).

My good ISFJ friend is very much pro-gay marriage. She likes to visit strip clubs, lol. Certainly not racist.

My ISTJ friend is friends with the ISFJ friend and she is more conservative in a lot of ways, but she is also pro-gay marriage.

All three of them are very friendly and kind. I think what it is, is if an STJ IS biased in some way, they are more likely to be really dogmatic about it. But really, it'd just be the ETJs the most - inferior Fi, and no Fe whatsoever.

SFJs, no offense to them, are more likely to be doormats than any sort of threat. Especially ISFJs.

 

[B00Bz]

I feel like NJs are probably the ones you have to worry about more in general.

 

[Pizzabeak]

Si-doms are definitely more OCD than any other type, which just includes forcing their worldview, tradition, ideas, or expectations on individuals. Aren't cops more likely to be ISJ?

 

[Jennywocky]

http://forums.intpcentral.com/archive/index.php/t-28575.html




http://policementalhealth.blogspot.com/2010/12/examining-police-personality.html

Compared to the general population cops tend to be:

Pragmatic
Isolative
Prejudice
Conservative
Suspicious
Cynical
Assertive
Action oriented

^^ take that as you may.

 

[LOGICZOMBIE]

If they've been raised in a homo-supportive community, then they'll probably glare at you like you've just shot Bambi for even suggesting that they'd be homophobic, and would treat you like you've just contracted leprosy. Conventionality cuts both ways.

bingo

 

[LOGICZOMBIE]

Yeah, while I think we're more complex than just going by "one thing alone" in reality (we often have currents of inclinations moving us about in the subconscious, nudging us), consciously I would rather evaluate a person by their behavior and character and ideas versus just dumping them in a box ("you gays" or "you conservatives" or "you rich people"). I think generalizations are hard to avoid mentally, because (1) we're absorbing messaging daily from a variety of sources and (2) we have had experiences that might suggest patterns, but I think ultimately we're better off even when that subtext comes to mind in giving individual people opportunities to be themselves versus representative of their subgroup.

THIS IS SUCH A TYPICAL INTP RESPONSE

 

[SteppeWanderer]

I usually go by certain tell tale signs which involve some of my past history to ascertain whether or not someone is homophobic, but usually when judging whether someone is worth my time homophobia is one of the first signs I use, it would be hard for me to make judgment earlier then that.

Being homophobic usually shows itself pretty quickly, or if someone holds relatively prejudice, and narrow minded type of constrained views then it is usually a given that they are also homophobic. I don’t know if you can avoid the awkwardness of homophobia outright.

 

[SteppeWanderer]

Their could be other methods of judging and identifying prejudice that are quicker then MBTI, maybe asking about human rights or favorite movies that relate to the experience. Also environment, clothing style

 

[LOGICZOMBIE]