Biological Sex & Socionics
I'm new to Socionics and I am curious about whether or not it covers personality differences for those of the same type but the opposite sex, and how they approach it if it was covered. Would anyone recommend some sources that specifically delve into the possible personality differences in opposite sex / same type?
Last edited by Fluffy Princess Unicorn; 02-28-2019 at 06:14 AM.
Can compare male and female descriptions of each type by Beskova, articles section on this website.
A lot of writers make comments on the differences between males and females of each type littered around in their descriptions.
This might have been a stupid question, lol. I was trying to take a shortcut into my research.
Hypothetically different reasons (biological, cultural) may shift to behavior and selfperception to reminding some types traits.Originally Posted by Hexcoder
For example, a T woman may prefer to see herself as more emotional than she is - due to social ideals.
There is a known sexes specifics given by the tests stats: there may be more women of F types (~60%) and lesser of T types. The opposite for men.
Also in Socionics texts you may meet, that INFP/IEI associate with feminity (by social norms) better than other types. And LSE/ESTJ with masculinity. I'd note that Fe types have lesser of compassion and more rude, what is against feminity ideals; while Se types better fit to warriors traits and more care about hierarhy what relates to men ideals. So I'd offer EST* and INF* for this. On practice the only difference is in T/F region, not big and that mb not real but distortions of selfperception due to nontypes influences.
Some tests alike made by Talanov use different weights for concrete questions for men and women answers.
> Would anyone recommend some sources that specifically delve into the possible personality differences in opposite sex / same type?
There are no serious texts. There were men descriptions and women descriptions of types by some authors - made by their own watching of people, without theory and much of use.
It's not a stupid question. I don't really think the male and female descriptions are deep enough. In many cases, you will find that males who are ethical types have accentuated feminine features, and vice versa for females with logical types. This isn't always the case and the strength of the difference depends on the individual type partially as well. I think certain types are more disposed to have masculine traits, especially Te dominant types. Ethical dominant types are often disposed to be a bit more typically feminine. The perceiving elements in a dominant position seem to have a characteristic androgyny. None of these are rules, though. Just stuff I've noticed sometimes.
The comments I've made apply physically as well as psychologically.
I see. I've read in MBTI materials that Thinker = Masculine, Feeler = Feminine. The meaning of "physical masculinity vs femininity" is obvious to me, but I would appreciate some elucidation of what I bolded: what exactly is meant by "feminine features," or "masculine traits," or "androgyny"? Where do you think the differences are specifically?
Males and females are wired differently on a neurological level; females with greater interconnectivity between each hemisphere (particularly the emotional and intuitive), while males have more interconnectivity between each hemisphere separately (especially more dense than women in the back of the brain). It is unclear to me at this time whether this disctinction is truly more associated with gender or personality type (or whether there should be a correlation made at all). If these things differ between gender, then opposite sex / same type individuals may have some differences. Alternatively, those differences could merely be supporting any existing notion that there are more females Fs and male Ts (but it's not as though the research was personality type oriented, so there wasn't any real correlation made).
ESE men can be quite macho. But soft at the same time.
Some T females are very feminine. Like an ILE woman I once dated. She was Harmonizing subtype.
The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.
(Jung on Si)
Figure out which parts of the body can change as a result of masculinization and feminization. That's your answer.
So you were referring to visual typing?
Last edited by Fluffy Princess Unicorn; 03-03-2019 at 01:36 PM.
Reply With Quote
