A thread for descriptions of the process of Dualization between ESIs and LIEs.
What things happen because of your Dual, which wouldn't have happened with any other type?
ESI-LIE Dualization Process
A thread for descriptions of the process of Dualization between ESIs and LIEs.
What things happen because of your Dual, which wouldn't have happened with any other type?
Have you ever read Jane Eyre? I always thought that was a great example of a dual LIE-ESI relationship from the point of view of the ESI (also a great example of the dynamic between a male Psuedo-Aggressor/Employee and a female Aggressor/Employer). It's super enlightening. I suspect Charlotte Brontė was a gamma herself.Originally Posted by Adam Strange
@Echo, I both read Jane Eyre and watched the 2011 movie by the same name. In both, I thought that Edward Rochester was so clearly an LIE that there wasn't any question about it. I particularly got that impression from the scene in which he hires Jane as a nanny. His behavior was so completely understandable to me that I could have been watching myself.
On the other hand, I believe that Jane is written as an EII, the Semi-Dual to the LIE. She is absolutely concerned about public propriety and the opinion of the community. ESIs are considerably more flexible in this area. They don't bend when it comes to their own wants and beliefs, but they don't pay that much attention to public opinion when it contradicts their own.
Furthermore, Rochester only became acceptable to Jane after he had lost his eyesight. To me, his eyesight was a metaphor for his Ni. Going blind finally turned Rochester into an acceptable LSE, a man who completely lacks foresight.
Hmm that's interesting but I still think that Jane was an ESI. She lacks the naivety that I've noticed a lot of EIIs have (they have tendency to romanticise the people around them). She chooses not to live with Mr. Rochester out of wedlock, not because of what others think, but because of a sincere conviction that it would be a mortal sin. Back in the Victorian era, God was just as real to people as the queen. She also has more fire in her than an EII (like her friend Helen Burns, who weakly submits to bullying). And she's also described as being stubborn and industrious. But here are a few quotes that I thought skewed ESI over EII:
Se over Ne:
“During these eight years my life was uniform: but not unhappy, because it was not inactive. ”
“I rose; I dressed myself with care: obliged to be plain—for I had no article of attire that was not made with extreme simplicity—I was still by nature solicitous to be neat. It was not my habit to be disregardful of appearance or careless of the impression I made: on the contrary, I ever wished to look as well as I could, and to please as much as my want of beauty would permit.”
“Listen, then, Jane Eyre, to your sentence: to-morrow, place the glass before you, and draw in chalk your own picture, faithfully, without softening one defect; omit no harsh line, smooth away no displeasing irregularity; write under it, ‘Portrait of a Governess, disconnected, poor, and plain.”
“Childish and slender creature! It seemed as if a linnet had hopped to my foot and proposed to bear me on its tiny wing. I was surly; but the thing would not go: it stood by me with strange perseverance, and looked and spoke with a sort of authority. I must be aided, and by that hand: and aided I was.”
Pseudo-agressor/Agressor dynamic:
“From less to more, I worked him up to considerable irritation; then, after he had retired, in dudgeon, quite to the other end of the room, I got up, and saying, “I wish you good-night, sir,” in my natural and wonted respectful manner, I slipped out by the side-door and got away. The system thus entered on, I pursued during the whole season of probation; and with the best success. He was kept, to be sure, rather cross and crusty; but on the whole I could see he was excellently entertained, and that a lamb-like submission and turtle-dove sensibility, while fostering his despotism more, would have pleased his judgment, satisfied his common-sense, and even suited his taste less.”
Duality:
“He was talking, at the moment, to Louisa and Amy Eshton. I wondered to see them receive with calm that look which seemed to me so penetrating: I expected their eyes to fall, their colour to rise under it; yet I was glad when I found they were in no sense moved. “He is not to them what he is to me,” I thought: “he is not of their kind. I believe he is of mine;—I am sure he is—I feel akin to him—I understand the language of his countenance and movements: though rank and wealth sever us widely, I have something in my brain and heart, in my blood and nerves, that assimilates me mentally to him. Did I say, a few days since, that I had nothing to do with him but to receive my salary at his hands? Did I forbid myself to think of him in any other light than as a paymaster? Blasphemy against nature! Every good, true, vigorous feeling I have gathers impulsively round him. I know I must conceal my sentiments: I must smother hope; I must remember that he cannot care much for me. For when I say that I am of his kind, I do not mean that I have his force to influence, and his spell to attract; I mean only that I have certain tastes and feelings in common with him. I must, then, repeat continually that we are for ever sundered:—and yet, while I breathe and think, I must love him.”
“Because,” he said, “I sometimes have a queer feeling with regard to you—especially when you are near me, as now: it is as if I had a string somewhere under my left ribs, tightly and inextricably knotted to a similar string situated in the corresponding quarter of your little frame.”
I am actually rereading Jane Eyre at the moment, even though I have never been a huge fan of the Brontė sisters. Their books are good, just not to my taste. Jane Eyre is very Gamma and Wuthering Heights is pure Beta. I always much preferred Jane Austen, whose books are very Alpha. I'm actually torn between whether Austen was an SEI or an LII. Her letters are full of Fe and the rakish ‘villains’ (if they can actually be called that) in four of her six novels were LIEs, which seems to point to SEI. However, those who knew her said she was extremely quiet in company and something about her writing style reminds me vaguely of Asimov (who was an LII). At first glance you’d be hard-pressed to find two more dissimilar writers. But on further examination, the commonalities start to appear. For example, a lack of symbolism and a straightforward style in which the writer explains to the reader exactly what ‘point’ they intend to make (Ti). There is also virtually no setting or character descriptions in either of their works, and both authors were very careful to make sure their stories were structured logically. Austen never relied on outlandish coincidences to propel a story forward. And her weak (or at least unvalued) Fi also seems pretty apparent in her works- something Charlotte Brontė criticised in one of her private letters:
“I have likewise read one of Miss Austen’s work’s ‘Emma’ – read it with interest and with just the degree of admiration which Miss Austen herself would have thought sensible and suitable – anything like warmth or enthusiasm; anything energetic, poignant, heart-felt, is utterly out of place in commending these works: all such demonstrations the authoress would have met with a well-bred sneer, would have calmly scorned as outré and extravagant. She does her business of delineating the surface of the lives of genteel English people curiously well; there is a Chinese fidelity, a miniature delicacy in the painting: she ruffles her reader by nothing vehement, disturbs him by nothing profound: the Passions are perfectly unknown to her; she rejects even a speaking acquaintance with that stormy Sisterhood; even to the Feelings she vouchsafes no more than an occasional graceful but distant recognition; too frequent converse with them would ruffle the smooth elegance of her progress. Her business is not half so much with the human heart as with the human eyes, mouth, hands and feet; what sees keenly, speaks aptly, moves flexibly, it suits her to study, but what throbs fast and full, though hidden, what the blood rushes through, what is the unseen seat of Life and the sentient target of Death – this Miss Austen ignores.”
It's actually been quite interesting to go back and reread old books from a socionics point of view.
I found the passage I was referring to:
“And what a distortion in your judgment, what a perversity in your ideas, is proved by your conduct! Is it better to drive a fellow-creature to despair than to transgress a mere human law, no man being injured by the breach? For you have neither relatives nor acquaintances whom you need fear to offend by living with me?”
This was true: and while he spoke my very conscience and reason turned traitors against me, and charged me with crime in resisting him. They spoke almost as loud as Feeling: and that clamoured wildly. “Oh, comply!” it said. “Think of his misery; think of his danger—look at his state when left alone; remember his headlong nature; consider the recklessness following on despair—soothe him; save him; love him; tell him you love him and will be his. Who in the world cares for you? or who will be injured by what you do?”
Still indomitable was the reply—“I care for myself. The more solitary, the more friendless, the more unsustained I am, the more I will respect myself. I will keep the law given by God; sanctioned by man. I will hold to the principles received by me when I was sane, and not mad—as I am now. Laws and principles are not for the times when there is no temptation: they are for such moments as this, when body and soul rise in mutiny against their rigour; stringent are they; inviolate they shall be. If at my individual convenience I might break them, what would be their worth? They have a worth—so I have always believed; and if I cannot believe it now, it is because I am insane—quite insane: with my veins running fire, and my heart beating faster than I can count its throbs. Preconceived opinions, foregone determinations, are all I have at this hour to stand by: there I plant my foot.”
-Jane Eyre, Chapter 27
My other job is Parking Lot Attendant during the local college's football games. I park cars in my yard, and so get to meet a lot of people, which I really like.
Yesterday, I noticed an 11-year-old kid who had set up a water stand near my yard. He seemed to be having no luck selling anything. As I watched him, I observed an older blonde woman get out of her parked car and walk towards him. I walked across the street to intercept her because she looked ESI to me. I asked her if he was her son, and she said that he was.
I said to the kid, "My own son used to have a pop stand here and he made a lot of money. Let me give you some pointers on how to improve your sales," and ran down a list of things he could do.
The kid was LSI, which makes sense if the mother is ESI. Se/Ni
The kid stood at attention and listened, and when I was done, his mother and I talked about the neighborhood and our jobs. She wasn't wearing a ring on her finger and was quite friendly towards me, so I told her that she seemed like a very nice person.
She immediately mentioned that she was going to meet her husband later, along with her son's younger and older sisters.
I said, "Oh, I thought you were single, because you aren't wearing a ring."
She didn't say anything in reply, but instead stepped over to her son's ice bin of water bottles, oriented herself so she was facing exactly 180 degrees away from me, and bent over at the waist to pick something up.
Mixed messages, I'd say.
Or maybe she's operating from a position which can be 100% defended as ethical, IDK.
I do wonder why she wasn't wearing her ring.
Also, your forwardness is giving me a good chuckle. Clear and direct communication is refreshing, though many do not know how to deal with it, I've noticed.
Everything interests me but nothing holds me.
If I had to guess why she wasn't wearing a ring, I'd say it was because she isn't entirely happy in her marriage. Lots of ESIs do not marry the right guy.
Hell, lots of guys do not marry the right ESI.
hmm, (estimated) age? I know some (people, not ESIs) who arent into the engagement ring or wedding ring thing. they tried wearing silicone rings but then they lost their strength/grip? (not sure) and now go ringless. These are all intuitives that i'm thinking of, though.
quoting for posterity
fun wordplay...
ESI: "prissy yet sexual"
(can't find source for that description, let me know if you know it!)
She might have been between 32 and 42. It's hard to tell with some women. Her skin was smooth and in good shape and I think she was a natural blonde, but she was starting to put on weight. She looked like the woman in this picture, if the woman in the picture put on ten pounds.
https://imgur.com/Epk3jvX
I'm on the lookout for single LIE females, so that I can introduce them to my newly-divorced ESI buddy. He seems to have a really hard time approaching women, but I have zero problems in that area.
I met this wonderful (for him) female LIE manager in my bank. She had shoulder-length, jet black hair, hard but intelligent eyes, and was slender and a good dresser. She wasn't wearing a ring, so I pressed for personal information and she said she was happily married.
I asked her why she wasn't wearing a ring, and she said that she never wore any jewelry. And she wasn't. No rings, no earrings, no chains or lockets, absolutely nothing other than a white blouse and tastefully tailored black clothes.
Well, I can understand that. I don't wear jewelry, either (not even a watch), and if she's an LIE, then she's a man inside and isn't into adornment. Although I did wear a ring when I was married, but it was really for self-defense against single women.
I told her that she and I were the same type, and that she has a very male personality. She laughed and said that she did feel like a man.
Too bad for my friend that the LIE bank manager is married.
My mother sometimes takes off her wedding ring if she's doing housework. She occasionally forgets to put it back on right away if she's very busy. Here’s the question: did she have an indentation or a tan line on her finger?
I didn't get a close enough or long enough look at her hand to determine if she normally wore a ring and just removed it for the day.
I thought that she was pretty friendly for an ESI. When I meet an ESI, I fully expect her to be guarded. However, this woman seemed completely open to my conversation.
I think that there is a window in time in which a married woman with kids wonders if she is still attractive, still visible. She wonders if she could still wander if she wanted to.
If she were IEI and the kids were almost grown, she'd buy a Jeep to try to define her new life. Probably the Jeep Liberty model. An ILI would buy a Jeep Rubicon. An LIE might buy a Jeep Renegade.*
But, she's an ESI and her family takes precedence over her freedom. Until it doesn't.
*
Last night it hit me that I'd misunderstood what Adam was saying in the last part that I quoted. He said:As in, one ESI as opposed to another ESI. The meaning is more subtle than what I initially grasped.
ESI: "prissy yet sexual"
(can't find source for that description, let me know if you know it!)
Yes, @spacious, ESIs vary a lot. I get along well with all of them, but some are much, much better than others.
So far, what this LIE-Te has concluded is that, for me, #1, the ESI has to be healthy and have a Secure Attachment style, and #2, ESI-Se's can be buddies for life, and #3, ESI-Fi's are marriage material.
You've really studied this good irl. Would it be possible to clarify the difference between 2 and 3?
That renegade is classy and kinda fruity at the same time. I enjoy the messenging. It makes me think of the adventurism inherent in the quadra.
Does the ring define a marriage?
I guess I've been spending time with to many dyads who "don't need a ring to know we are to together"
That's really interesting. my mother is an ESI-Fi and my dad is an LIE-Ni. Their relationship is a really good one and it has been for over 30 years despite them only knowing each other one month before they got engaged. But sometimes if theyre under stress they can get into arguments (although these tend to be resolved very quickly. Ive noticed that they cant really stay mad at each other that long.)
Anyways, your comment got me thinking about a recent argument they had over what they were going to do on a Saturday when their original plans fell through. My mother was venting to me because she was looking to my dad to tell her what they should do, but he was off on his own in his workshop, fiddling with his latest electronics project (probably waiting for her to come outside to the garden and tell him that she wanted to go do something). Now Im wondering if this all happened because of their mismatched subtypes.
I know 3 married LIE/ESI Dual couples and I have many more ESI family members and friends. I don't know what initially attracted them but the ESIs both think that the LIEs are hot so maybe it's that. ESIs tend to overestimate people's good and bad qualities so of course play on your strengths. They do fight but of course they do. You're matching up se mobilizing with se creative. They both value pressuring themselves and others as a strategy for improving their situation. They're fighting for the relationship, together lol. In one relationship the ESI seems to always be saying things like "I made him" go do xyz etc. lol. I don't know why she always says it like that. Anyway, all duals criticize each other. It looks worse from the outside. It's called mutual correction for a reason. Sometimes the other esi lie couple yell when they're discussing problem solving but they're both smiling. Lol so cute.
I don't see why anyone with time, the knowledge of socionics, and a semi attractive appearance couldn't find a dual and get them interested. Maybe try the mobilizing. They kinda get hypnotized by ni and it inspires them to be more energetic and try to talk with you more. (Basing this on experience of LSI and ESI people I know, not theory). I will admit it takes a LOT of time investment using online dating as a strategy to find them. I just roleplay as someone that anyone would want on my dating profile and match with anyone remotely possibly SLI. I word everything in line with what an SLI would think. Maybe try adding values on your profile that are more like their ego than yours, use ni with it.
I think ESIs can be such awesome people for the stability they bring to their loved ones. Wish I could be of more assistance to the main topic but I don't know the stages of duality other than 1. Get them attracted 2. Keep them interested 3. Be yourself but attempt to smooth out problems as they come up. 4. Take their boundaries seriously and give them time to compromise. Your dual will think about the things you said in hindsight and want to show you that they understand where you're coming from, if things get smoothed out easily, they will see the magic and want more. 5. Pray that they finally understand what an asset you are.
Yes it's weird to have the cheat codes that they don't have, can be one sided at times. And dating in a smaller pool messes up the odds a bit.
I don't know. I'm finding it near impossible to find an age appropriate ESE man online. I get more likes from LSIs, SLIs, SEEs, and LSEs than I know what to do with (There are loads in major cities who are still single in their 30s). I sometimes get a handful LIEs and SEIs. Once in a blue moon, I’ll even get an ESI. But no ESEs to date.
Hm well that's interesting. I don't want to derail this thread too much but It took me a long time to tune my profile so that SLIs would actually click like on it. I kept changing it over and over. I spent a lot of time using different strategies. Using your ego block is not the best choice on dating profiles. I also strolled forums and boards looking for what SLIs were saying that they wanted. Because if you don't understand socionics then your dual probably seems too different. Either too weird or too good for you. And it matches people based on interests which is often the opposite typically in the opposite club.
Not saying that this is the case for you, but perhaps you're not typing everyone correctly? I know an ESE who used a dating site but I don't know what their strategy was or what they go for. If you're reasonable attractive, you should be able to tune your profile so that almost anyone would think you're a catch. I'll recommend you to share your profile on Reddit subs that flame people for terrible profiles. Your profile would have to be desirable in general before anything else.
By the way it took me a really long time to figure out that you need to use their mobilizing and ego to attract them with just words if they make it past your first picture which admittedly matters most probably.
I'm a bit curious, what did she look like that made you think that woman was ESI ? Looks ? Movement ? Facial expressions ?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
