Which types tend to get laid?

[Amber]

My Te is tingling…. It’s telling me… You’re a fucking idiot. SLI indeed.



Lol. Here come the pussy worshippers to the rescue.

Dude, you are freakin' ugly and boring as hell.

I dunno for sure if Words is LSE or SLE, but making WILD guesses and trying to show off as a strong PLAAAAAYA doesn't make you hot, smart, or LSI for your record.

[Computer Loser]

Dude, you are freakin' ugly and boring as hell.

I dunno for sure if Words is LSE or SLE, but making WILD guesses and trying to show off as a strong PLAAAAAYA doesn't make you hot, smart, or LSI for your record.

Aw boo hooooo.

[Amber]

Aw boo hooooo.

[The Reality Denialist]

Never put much emphasis on that. I know I tend to attract and repulse many with my you know ... my spacy intellectual goofiness. I have hard time with approach intimately. So conceptually I get laid a lot.

Answer: the ones who are capable at attraction and are needy (or aware of it enough).

[Soupman]

lol

What about ESI?

Sure they are above Miley Cyrus but below the technocrats:


Top are SEE
ESE: pleasure hunters


SLE: conquers
LSE: your business man

SEI: casual party goer
ESI: blends with the world


EIE: miley cyrus
IEE: adventurous hippy


LIE: your adventurous researcher
ILE: goofy outgoing nerd


LSI: Controlled robot
SLI: lone artisan


Bottom ILI and LII

[nondescript]

I'm an ESI who can't get pussy. I'm too stiff and serious.

Well...I'm an ESI who DOESN'T NEED a RANDOM one. I need THE instead of A vagina. Hell, it's not even about that, it's much more about pers...whom am I kidding?

And if you're stiff and male, take it in your hand(s) dam it! Where's the problem at again?

[Olimpia]

Sure they are above Miley Cyrus but below the technocrats:


Top are SEE
ESE: pleasure hunters


SLE: conquers
LSE: your business man

SEI: casual party goer
ESI: blends with the world


EIE: miley cyrus
IEE: adventurous hippy


LIE: your adventurous researcher
ILE: goofy outgoing nerd


LSI: Controlled robot
SLI: lone artisan


Bottom ILI and LII

You forgot IEI, haha.

[nondescript]

You forgot IEI, haha.

IEI dreams of a passionate sex. So I wouldn't exactly imagine IEI's having a lot of action. Unless you've got attention of something Se, of course! Be it SEE, SLE or ESI-Se or LSI-Se.

[Soupman]

You forgot IEI, haha.

Thanks:

SEE
ESE: pleasure hunters


SLE: conquers
LSE: your business man

SEI: casual party goer
ESI: blends with the world


EIE: miley cyrus
IEE: adventurous hippy


LIE: your adventurous researcher
ILE: goofy outgoing nerd

IEI: dreamers
EII: distant gurus

LSI: Controlled robot
SLI: lone artisan


Bottom ILI and LII

[Olimpia]

Thanks:

(...)

I would edit your list in the following way:

1. Assertive Thrill-Seekers:
SEE
SLE

2. Outgoing Approachers:
ESE
LSE

3. Whimsical Fun-Lovers
IEE
EIE

4. Sensual Persuaders
ESI
LSI

5. Straightforward Sapios*
ILE
LIE

6. Quiet Comforters
SEI
SLI

7. Abstract Breathtakers
IEI
ILI

8. Hesitant Idealists
EII
LII


*people who are desired by sapiosexual people


P.S: ILI and EII could be switched. Furthermore, I've noticed that the greater the self-esteem of the EII, the more likely they will be able to climb the "ladder". Given that in my experience, most EIIs struggle with self-doubt, they tend to be at last place. Unless, again, they reach their full potential. The same could apply to IEI as well.

[noid]

Game is taking control of the forum, omg even in a somewhat intelligent place like here

Game = 100% bullshit mind troll destined to empty wallet of frustrated average joe
You are all in a socionic forum and socionic itself debunk 99% of false PUA game stuff "theories"

get a mind
stop being ressentfull, you get chicks you get chicks, you don't you don't that's all
be yourself

[noid]

Let's play a bit the game.
Srsly I don't think it's type related.
I know 1 INFp confirmed who can bang easily, 1 INFj who have many one night standard, 1 ENFj with nothing, 1 ESTp wich is in a LTR (with the INFp sister of the INFp guy discussed before), and any other fact wich can debunk your poor stereotype

[The Reality Denialist]

I would edit your list in the following way:
5. Straightforward Sapios*
ILE
LIE

*people who are desired by sapiosexual people

Yes, the alpha SFs. I can definitely see that. I know few ESEs who have been all over me because of their sapioness.

[summerprincess]

NOT INFp

[leakingdreams]

This thread is two months old and I can barely remember the last I had a thought about my type.

I was on a forum where most of the active members are guys who are getting higher than average notch-counts through doing 'game' (they're very quick to ban anyone who whines or isn't consistently acting out the stuff they recommend and reporting back) and the vast majority seem to be extroverts in general - SLE, LSE, ILE, EIE, etc. Think I spotted an IEI or LIE who fucks with chinese girls. It makes sense because you have to have little ego or subjectivity to comfortably act out some of the 'scripts' they give you without dwelling on how incongruent it feels intially (like initially approaching a girl you see during the day indirectly about an innocuous topic that you don't care about at all, like directions or whatever, threading a whole conversation off of that, and then asking her out).

I just wanted to say: I agree with all your observations. I think you should use your Fi to slip right into some sweet sugar walls by finding their emotional core and using betamale manipulation techniques. If you happen to find one who will go ass to mouth, the chances are that she is likely your dual--so be careful as she will want your dick exclusively.

[DaftPunk]

@suedehead

You ask which types tend to get laid. The answer is every type. Even though I think some types do get laid more often than other it's for every type possible to get laid.

The real question in this thread is why you don't get laid and if it's related with your type. The answer is no, because everyone willing to invest enough time or waiting for favorable possibilities can get laid. So get mentaly healthy and get laid if that's your goal.

The theory that nice girl go only for jerks is huge bullshit and was invented by idiotic narcissists who are not able to estimate their real market value because they see themseles through glasses of narcicissme.

[GuavaDrunk]

(snip) how incongruent it feels initially (like initially approaching a girl you see during the day indirectly about an innocuous topic that you don't care about at all, like directions or whatever, threading a whole conversation off of that, and then asking her out).

It's extremely weird to hear that a) one of the pillar techniques of gently asking someone for a favour is "incongruous" (not to mention that it's also culture-related) b) you seriously think it incongruous to not directly walk up to a stranger and go "SEX?", especially when that stranger is statistically at a noticeably risk of assault, rape, strangulation, dismemberment w/e from other strangers. No shit they won't just walk off with you.

c) You don't get that showing poor social calibration is a large hint to other people that you will suck in bed and won't be worth their time, simply because you show low awareness of someone's responses. Try practicing partnered dancing or something. If you want to swan off with someone you gotta peacock better than that.

[GuavaDrunk]

It's not to paint a caricature out of you. It's to point out that the people you approach don't know you and that unfortunately, there does exist a bunch of men who *are* creeps or whatnot, and the people you approach *don't know that you aren't one*. The whole song and dance is to show awareness of the context you're in from the other person's point of view.

Yes, it sucks that the constraint exists; no, no-one gets a free pass.

Eg: Suppose I stop next to someone's garden and stare at their flowers because I really like them, the owner would be fully justified in giving me the side-eye because *they don't know* that I'm not looking to burgle them. Now if they called the cops or shot at me I'd obviously be miffed to say the least, but they don't owe me trust or appreciation. They have their own interests to look out for.

The reason I insist on that point is that while you are concerned with 'what women want and think' as a means to your own ends, you frame it in terms of 'your own concerns and what women think of those', which distorts the final product. Someone other than you will not necessarily be concerned about the same topics, and/or not necessarily in the same way. Know Thy Enemy better than that, if you will. Or Know Thyself better - they're similar things in the long run.

Re: being a minority - the racism has to suck

[Disturbed]

IME, SLE-Ti can get laid by almost anyone they want. Donald Trump is the only SLE-Ti I've ever known of who repulsed so many women. SLE-Se has a harder time getting laid... think Ted Bundy.

I'd imagine LSI-Se females can also get laid by anyone they want; they tend to openly show their sexuality. LSI-Ti just aren't in to sex without emotional connection and they find sexuality in public inappropriate.

I'm sensual as fuck like my Se subtype duals, having super idiosyncratic kinks (even though i can't verbalize them that well), getting turned on by so much. But the LSI-Se ladies never want to put their anuses on me for my own well being and it sucks... they never find me attractive (I don't blame them) and it sucks, but then I'm not good at picking up on whether someone is really, honestly attracted to me and then i think it's just damnation if i pursue them unlike how i used to be.

[Ikite iru]

Men: probably attractive people who are emotionally a bit charming and know how to keep a conversation going and see desire in other people and also don't appear needy. I think any type can potentially do that.
Women: I don't think that's really a difficult task and most are more confronted with the problem of finding a man that's actually worth a damn.

the more abstract you are the less emphasis you are probably going to place on getting laid and the more conrete you are the more important sex is going to be in your life, so the latter gets probably laid more often.

[Adam Strange]

Sx-first types tend to get laid. It's kind of in the definition.

[Raptor2016]

The impulse to storm the farm of desire and pleasure in hibernating crystals of the karaoke sensei is mermaid and star

[Ave]

Sx-first types tend to get laid. It's kind of in the definition.

Not really, no. Having a dominant instinct doesn't mean successfully meeting that instinctual need. Also, the needs of the Sx instinct has more to do with sexual validation than "getting laid".

[one]

People in relationships / promiscuous ppl

[Adam Strange]

Not really, no. Having a dominant instinct doesn't mean successfully meeting that instinctual need. Also, the needs of the Sx instinct has more to do with sexual validation than "getting laid".

In my experience, being Sx-first means that I'm trying. And a person who works consistently at something usually succeeds more than someone who is an occasional participant. I spend a lot of time in a "resting" state, usually recovering from my last misadventure, but then I'm back again, trying to connect. I mean, I need that close, intimate connection. And to me, connection means sex. I'm not very sophisticated here.

After watching me for a while, someone on this forum sent me this song:



If a woman proves that she doesn't like sex as much as I do, she's history.

She might also be history if she's rude to waiters, is publicly critical of me, or wouldn't make a good mother to her children, but liking sex is also a Yes/No filter.


And @Ave, what do you mean by "sexual validation"? Please explain how you think this is different from "getting laid".

[G AI]

LII in my experience.

[Adam Strange]

LII in my experience.

Dude, there is a difference between "getting laid" and being passed out, horizontal, on the floor.

[Ave]

And @Ave, what do you mean by "sexual validation"? Please explain how you think this is different from "getting laid".

Feeling one's ego validated by attracting a mate, when that feeling of being desirable is even more satisfying than the sex act. Kind of like "the hunt is more energizing than the kill". I think the SX instinct feels energized and vitalized when one can attract someone, even if you end up not having sex. That isn't to say the SX instinct doesn't enjoy sex, but I think it enjoys validation even more.

IMO, it's usually SX blind people who mystify the sex act even if they aeren't virgins or teenagers, lol. It's also more often men who due this than women, due to social pressure. Men are often (though less so nowadays) pressured to "get laid" and women oftenfeel the need to not be too "available", since attracting the wrong man can be dangerous. In any case, though, I think Sx blind more often mystifies sex itself one way or another, regardless of gender or orientation.

[Ave]

In my experience, being Sx-first means that I'm trying. And a person who works consistently at something usually succeeds more than someone who is an occasional participant. I spend a lot of time in a "resting" state, usually recovering from my last misadventure, but then I'm back again, trying to connect. I mean, I need that close, intimate connection. And to me, connection means sex. I'm not very sophisticated here.

Here you are describing a need for connection (expressed through sex) which is the realm of SO, not SX. I know many authors describe SX as being about "one on one" or "connection" and SO as being about interest in groupsbut I think this is wrong. I'm more on the side of those authors who would describe SX as the need to attract a potential mate. Connection, emotional connection, expressed through sex or not, is SO.

[Lord Pixel]

SEE probably.