Supervision or Benefit?

[Hermit Soul]

I'm trying to type an ex-friend of mine. Our relationship ended on sour terms.

But we used to be quite close. We would always hang out everywhere together, we would always confide secrets in each other. Everybody around us would often comment about how close we are. But despite how close we are, there are times when we will get into some huge misunderstandings, and whenever those misunderstandings happened it's always me who did the apologising, because this is how much I cherished the friendship. But one day, I finally had enough and I decided to stop apologizing, and now we are no longer on speaking terms anymore.

About this ex-friend of mine, whenever we have a disagreement with each other, the conflict tends to be quite explosive, with them hurling lots of harsh words in my directions, words which tend to sting me deeply.

This friend is someone whom I loved and cherished deeply, but at the same time, they are also someone who has hurt me so deeply that I have to shut them out of my life to avoid getting hurt by them again.


Based on what I've written, which intertype does this sound like? Supervision? Or Benefit?

[Cosmic Teapot]

Why do you think that it was a supervision or benefit relation? IME even quasi-identity could be an option but as far as I can tell I see few instances in your description that would point to a distinct relation.

[Bertrand]

yeah need more details to really get a good picture of what this could be

[Hermit Soul]

Why do you think that it was a supervision or benefit relation? IME even quasi-identity could be an option but as far as I can tell I see few instances in your description that would point to a distinct relation.

I think it was supervision or benefit as I find myself looking up to them all the time. They are like someone perfect who could do no wrong in my eyes, and I often placed them on a much higher pedestal than myself. But these feelings of mine seems to be one-sided, because they don't really focus on my good points, but they mainly like focusing on my weak points a lot and then criticize me for my weak points, which is what supervision and benefit tends to do. I don't think it's quasi-identical though, as they like attacking my weak points too much. The words that came of their mouth are often so harsh that it actually landed me into depression for a year. But in quasi-identical relations, people doesn't attack each other weak points, so I don't think it's quasi-identical.

[Adam Strange]

Both Supervision and Benefit are such problematic relationships. In both cases, one person is looking up to the other, and the other is looking down on them.

Personally, I can tell my Supervisor apart from my Benefactor by VI and by hanging around them for perhaps an hour to pick up on enough clues to tell which type they are.
In the case of my Supervisor, I look at them as an interesting person who is competent and respectable and sensible and is easy to talk to.
In the case of my Benefactor, I look at them as an exciting person (I only know female IEE's) and I get this feeling like it's Christmas morning and I'm about to open some really great presents, and even if the presents suck, I still feel great just from the experience.

On the other hand, my Supervisor looks at me as someone who is interesting and attractive in some ways, but who just doesn't get it and who clearly never will.
And my Benefactor looks at me as someone who needs their help, and they want to help me, but I just don't seem to be able to put their good help and advice into practice.

Eventually, both my Supervisor and Benefactor get tired of throwing their time and effort into a bottomless pit. And yet, I continue to like them and feel like it's Christmas.

I married my Supervisor because (see above) and because I admired the hell out of her effortless use of her dominant function (Si), which I know I suck at. Eventually, she got tired of my inability to coordinate my clothes (or something....pick anything......the failures of your Supervisee at life in general gradually accumulate) and she moved out.

My ex-wife's sister happens to be her dual, my Benefactor. When my Supervisor ex-wife and I were engaged to be married, we went to visit her sister, my Benefactor. It was winter, I needed boots, and my fiance told me to buy new ones and her sister volunteered to drive me to the store because she knew the best place to buy boots. My fiance stayed home and my sister-in-law-to-be drove me to the store, and I clearly remember having this feeling come over me like it was Christmas and thinking, "I really like this woman. She seems so sensible and fun at the same time. We are going to be great friends."
She, on the other hand, did not share my feelings. In fact, she was wondering why her sister's fiance was being so nice and friendly towards her. She was wondering if her sister was marrying some creep who was coming on to her. She was seriously misinterpreting my actions, because I had exactly zero romantic feelings towards her. I already felt like the luckiest person in the world to have snagged my Supervisor. (Why the hell isn't Socionics taught in school so people can avoid making these stupid mistakes?) Eventually, she understood that I didn't harbor any romantic feelings towards her, but it took her a few minutes to comprehend this.

Note: In my experience, IEE's are forward as hell, but they look for the slightest signs of reciprocity and if they see any, they immediately conclude that you are despicable. This works perfectly well to filter out everyone but their inert SLI duals, but it can be a pain in the ass for everyone else.

Yesterday, I was talking to an IEE whom I know and told her that she was my Benefactor. I was trying to get her to understand why I persistently like her and she feels nothing (or less) towards me. Incidentally, this woman is short, has gray hair and narrow shoulders and is broad in the hips and has gap teeth and I still think she's kind of hot. FML and F Benefactor relations.
So I tell her that Benefactor relations are something that everyone has with some person or another, and that she has a Benefactor, too. I think for a moment and ask her if she knows Chris Pratt (ESE)?
She thinks for a moment, gets a picture of the guy in her head and a slight smile on her face and nods Yes.
I tell her, "The feelings that we have for our Benefactors are involuntary. We just feel that way. Everyone feels that way toward their Benefactor. In fact, the way that you feel towards Chris Pratt is the way that I feel about you."
She makes the mental connection in an instant and involuntarily glances toward my crotch to see if I have a hard-on. (I don't.) I don't think she was even aware that she did it. So it's pretty clear to me how she feels about Chris Pratt. She thinks that if she met him in real life, it would be like Christmas morning and she'd be a kid opening presents.
However, I'm pretty sure that Chris Pratt would look at her in exactly the same way that she looks at me. Which is as a person who just doesn't get it.

[Ave]

Not necessarily either.

I don't really find the asymmetry of benefit/supervision to play out in real life relations. I understand how it is supposed to work, so before someone quotes me and reads me the descriptions, let me make that clear. But I don't find it is so easy to identify these relations based on whether you look up to someone. You can look up to someone for a myriad of reasons, most of them not type related.

IME I often admire people in my own quadra. So maybe it is type related, just not in the way we think. I don't see the asymmetry in benefit and supervision as something we are conscious of, especially not at first.

OP, it is hard to say what relationship this is, though it doesn't sound like they are in your quadra. They could be, but it seems unlikely. The reason I say this is because someone saying something that demolishes me generally doesn't happen in my own quadra. I can find the behaviors of certian quadra members wrong or questionable, sometimes. But I wouldn't say deliberately mean.

Anything else is still pretty much open as far as relations go though. Really we would need more info about this relationship to really tell.

@Adam Strange how are you able to discern such clear patterns in relations between types? I ask because it all seems pretty muddy to me. It seems like there are some aspects of relationships which correspond to the descriptions, then most of the relationship experience itself which is not (nor could not be) contained in the descriptions. That is, if we are certain of our types to begin with (not casting doubt on you self-typing but personally I always have nagging sense of doubt as to mine). I personally find this theory really limited in intepreting relationships, though maybe I am blind to certian things.

[Bertrand]

I think Adam's post is describing the dynamics of how in benefit/supervision, the person from the "superior" vantage point "runs ahead" of the other... everyone is on a "trajectory" so to speak, but the deal is with the superior dyad is they're picking up right where the inferior dyad leaves off. so they can "test" the inferior subject because they see what he's trying to achieve. the deal with supervision is its more harsh because its from the perspective of a the base/polr interaction which takes on the character of social control. not only do they kind of have a sense of the other person they can clearly see the shortcomings of what they're putting out. in other words, if IEE is the master of Ne they know how to tickle the demonstrative of LIE in order to entice them in a way that exposes the shortcomings of the LIE (on Fi), because they clearly perceive the dynamics of how Ni->Ne works and are instead concerning themselves with the downrange problems of such an approach (Te one sidedness as manifest in inferior Fi). thus LIE "fails" the test, whereas SLI (their dual) wouldn't. these dynamics loosely approximate duality (everyone is subconsciously aiming at their dual) but with the time disjunction.. thus the test is aimed at SLI and SLI knows how to behave "appropriately": SLI and IEE are on the same page. thus your dual tests you and you know how to respond appropriately that signals that you two have a similar "mission" and understanding. ESI would receive the same behavior appropriately and know how to correct the shortcomings or build on them in a way that is mutually supportive (and appropriate for the strengths and concerns of the dual), whereas in disjunctive interactions a feeling of inferiority can arise

its sort of funny I didn't think adam's perception was all that clear of what was really going on, but more a behavioral and anecdotal gloss over the deeper dynamic, and yet Avebury is like "how are you so clear!" which goes to show how different perspectives operate

[ooo]

Hmmm I've been trying to put a socionic label to the relationship with my ex too, but by reading the descriptions for the relationships I thought we could fit in, in order: kindred, benefit (for me), semidual, supervision (me supervising), look-alike, mirror or duality; well, I didn't find any clarity through a reading of them. I'll be very brief but I think this can be a fair backbone to the possible IRs I've been through in one relationship (because yeah, socionics certainty):

-kindred: deep understanding, affection, but distancing over time because of different values/lifestyles

-benefit: vv romantic relationship that is difficult to break for the deep enchantment of the beneficiary towards the benefactor, who in turn can see smth worthy in the relationship and in the partner (?? lol)

-semidual: deep attraction, good complementarity but with sparsed "conflicts"

-supervision: power dynamics that will strain the relationship from the inside, but both partners can maintain the relationship in the hope of fixing each other

-look-alike: good understanding and communication, similar lifestyles, but what comes naturally to one is not for the other

-mirror: synergetic view of the world which can cause conflicts in terms of who's right and who's wrong, despite this, good feelings

-duality: complementary view of the world that can become boring and demand to the partners to look for smth else outside


The thing is that in all honesty, I feel like my relationship contained all of these elements (they're all similar more or less but oh well) to some good extent, and this just to keep it in the lines of the possible types my ex and I could be; if you add more variables, if for instance we were conflictors or activators, I'd recognize some of those IR characters in my relationship too.

So the IR should not be a guide to how the relationship will develop, ultimately because all the relationships descriptions resemble each other in their overall structure: understanding, less or more clashes, depart. This is why I've had the greatest arguments with the people who were not my conflictors nor anything bad, and it's the same reason why I can feel the deepest sympathy for someone whom I know damn well wouldn't be a good match for me, but that can be so different from what I am to inspire me and make me smile because of the life I can only see through him/her.

In particular I was thinking about the feelings supposedly caused by some IR over the others, like supervision is "bad" while duality is "good", so who do I feel all that "bad" with?, who instead do I feel more in tune with? Now, the most unpleasant feelings I've experienced were caused by my sister, repeatedly, we can't stop fighting, and no doubt, she's neither my supervisor nor my conflict. *My ex and my sis are very probably of the same type, and despite the fact they're completely different relationships, I can't find any resemblances in how they work/ed too, I've never clashed much with my bf, and I've never felt, with him, the same stress my sis puts me through*. At the same time, I've always had besties that are SEEs, even ESEs, LIEs, or INFP/Js and with no exceptions, it was tiring at times (...which relationship isn't?!) but I had a good friendship with them, and in no way I'd feel like labelling those friendships as "supervision" or "semi" or wtv they were. And in some cases, like for the girl that I think is ESE, things were so good that it was as if we had something wrong, because we've never had an argument, not once, and this didn't help to keep us together in the long run.

If we have to be very approximative and just put some shallow label on the dynamics of a whatever relationship, I doubt that said label would depict the relationship for what it truly is.
Just to be realistic, analyze the things that made you mad, analyze the reasons why the person infront of you reacts in those ways, and if you can, try to understand that often people don't mean bad when they behave the way they do and if they do, it's just better not to deal with jerks, so let them know they are and if they can't do anything about it, just cut them out.
These patterns can reflect some quadra values or some type or clubs or wtv, but most often it is just the complexity of human nature, which is very much unpredictable and not easily explained by an 8 boxes model, to dictate if in any given moment we can deal with the person next to us, be it conflictor or duality.

The illusion is to think that we can find someone who will never have a bad word for us or will never be let down whatever we do, because socionics. Reality is that the deeper you know someone the more clashes there will be, under a shape or another, and it's the surfing through these clashes that sanctify your love. That is then obviously not related to the socionics dynamics.

Socionics should help us work out the relationships focusing on the individuals involved, but this means work, not the total submission to an established made up rule which becomes just a good excuse when things go bad and we can just say "oh well, I was wrong, he was my conflictor, not my dual, shame on him!".

Socionics should be an aid to help people deal with each other, despite all the apparent or non apparent differences, not a wall to divide the ones who don't respond to our conception of the world. But the latter requires way less effort ofc, and even has the advantage of putting us in the magic ivory tower of how it's never our fault.

[Ave]

^^

[Faith]

Both Supervision and Benefit are such problematic relationships. In both cases, one person is looking up to the other, and the other is looking down on them.

Personally, I can tell my Supervisor apart from my Benefactor by VI and by hanging around them for perhaps an hour to pick up on enough clues to tell which type they are.
In the case of my Supervisor, I look at them as an interesting person who is competent and respectable and sensible and is easy to talk to.
In the case of my Benefactor, I look at them as an exciting person (I only know female IEE's) and I get this feeling like it's Christmas morning and I'm about to open some really great presents, and even if the presents suck, I still feel great just from the experience.

On the other hand, my Supervisor looks at me as someone who is interesting and attractive in some ways, but who just doesn't get it and who clearly never will.
And my Benefactor looks at me as someone who needs their help, and they want to help me, but I just don't seem to be able to put their good help and advice into practice.

Eventually, both my Supervisor and Benefactor get tired of throwing their time and effort into a bottomless pit. And yet, I continue to like them and feel like it's Christmas.

I married my Supervisor because (see above) and because I admired the hell out of her effortless use of her dominant function (Si), which I know I suck at. Eventually, she got tired of my inability to coordinate my clothes (or something....pick anything......the failures of your Supervisee at life in general gradually accumulate) and she moved out.

My ex-wife's sister happens to be her dual, my Benefactor. When my Supervisor ex-wife and I were engaged to be married, we went to visit her sister, my Benefactor. It was winter, I needed boots, and my fiance told me to buy new ones and her sister volunteered to drive me to the store because she knew the best place to buy boots. My fiance stayed home and my sister-in-law-to-be drove me to the store, and I clearly remember having this feeling come over me like it was Christmas and thinking, "I really like this woman. She seems so sensible and fun at the same time. We are going to be great friends."
She, on the other hand, did not share my feelings. In fact, she was wondering why her sister's fiance was being so nice and friendly towards her. She was wondering if her sister was marrying some creep who was coming on to her. She was seriously misinterpreting my actions, because I had exactly zero romantic feelings towards her. I already felt like the luckiest person in the world to have snagged my Supervisor. (Why the hell isn't Socionics taught in school so people can avoid making these stupid mistakes?) Eventually, she understood that I didn't harbor any romantic feelings towards her, but it took her a few minutes to comprehend this.

Note: In my experience, IEE's are forward as hell, but they look for the slightest signs of reciprocity and if they see any, they immediately conclude that you are despicable. This works perfectly well to filter out everyone but their inert SLI duals, but it can be a pain in the ass for everyone else.

Yesterday, I was talking to an IEE whom I know and told her that she was my Benefactor. I was trying to get her to understand why I persistently like her and she feels nothing (or less) towards me. Incidentally, this woman is short, has gray hair and narrow shoulders and is broad in the hips and has gap teeth and I still think she's kind of hot. FML and F Benefactor relations.
So I tell her that Benefactor relations are something that everyone has with some person or another, and that she has a Benefactor, too. I think for a moment and ask her if she knows Chris Pratt (ESE)?
She thinks for a moment, gets a picture of the guy in her head and a slight smile on her face and nods Yes.
I tell her, "The feelings that we have for our Benefactors are involuntary. We just feel that way. Everyone feels that way toward their Benefactor. In fact, the way that you feel towards Chris Pratt is the way that I feel about you."
She makes the mental connection in an instant and involuntarily glances toward my crotch to see if I have a hard-on. (I don't.) I don't think she was even aware that she did it. So it's pretty clear to me how she feels about Chris Pratt. She thinks that if she met him in real life, it would be like Christmas morning and she'd be a kid opening presents.
However, I'm pretty sure that Chris Pratt would look at her in exactly the same way that she looks at me. Which is as a person who just doesn't get it.

That's very cute Adam, though, I'd say that both of your descriptions (benefactor/supervisor) applies in my case with LIE. I want to help LIE and I know that they never get me or my intentions at all, even when they get some part of it since we are both practical and logical and business oriented (Te). Eventually I get tired and understand that my efforts are not enough and I can't provide them what they need or even make them understand my points of view, they are in need of something else, some Se Fi to mobilize and motivate them in the right direction.

[Adam Strange]

We are in need of ESI's, @Aki.

[Bertrand]

you should try to strike up a relationship with strat based on mutual love of socionics. she's single, you're about the same age, similar interests, sounds perfect

[lemontrees]

When I've had problems with these types (which isn't always):

Benefactor seemed to misunderstand and try to correct something different from what I meant.

Supervisor will know what I am saying or thinking, but will just say my worldview is wrong. They "understand" you but can't forgive you, which is crushing.

[velveteen]

Supervisor believes deeply in the superiorness of their own worldview, treats you like a petulant child that needs to be taught the ways of the world. Invalidates your worldview.

Benefactor holds on deeply to their own values, refuses to consider yours.

I've been surrounded by both my whole life. Both mean well, but it's honestly been very damaging to my self-esteem and overall happiness. My supervisor has a way of belittling me and my benefactor just plunges me into thinking about things I really don't need to.

[Number 9 large]

I'm trying to type an ex-friend of mine. Our relationship ended on sour terms.

But we used to be quite close. We would always hang out everywhere together, we would always confide secrets in each other. Everybody around us would often comment about how close we are. But despite how close we are, there are times when we will get into some huge misunderstandings, and whenever those misunderstandings happened it's always me who did the apologising, because this is how much I cherished the friendship. But one day, I finally had enough and I decided to stop apologizing, and now we are no longer on speaking terms anymore.

About this ex-friend of mine, whenever we have a disagreement with each other, the conflict tends to be quite explosive, with them hurling lots of harsh words in my directions, words which tend to sting me deeply.

This friend is someone whom I loved and cherished deeply, but at the same time, they are also someone who has hurt me so deeply that I have to shut them out of my life to avoid getting hurt by them again.


Based on what I've written, which intertype does this sound like? Supervision? Or Benefit?

Just sounds like somebody with poor self knowledge

[spacious]

duality: complementary view of the world that can become boring and demand to the partners to look for smth else outside

mm