#focused on how horrific everything else was. im sorry for having to blog about this but i feel like im losing my fucking MIND.

[volfoss]

I FORGOT ABOUT THE REPRODUCTION VIA AMPUTATIONNNNNNN

[ill-be-istj-if-no-one-else-is]

So this’ll probably be a multiple part submission, but again it’s the “ISTJ 4w5” anon here with more info about myself for better typing. Sorry it took so long to get back, I was out of town. So I read your post about what information is helpful when typing so I’ll do my best. Basically, I’ve gone back and forth with all different types, trying to find my best fit. A friend of mine who’s pretty knowledgeable about mbti was the one who suggested I may be ISTJ for a few reasons: I usually (1/?)

think everything through at least a little-as I’ve gotten older I’ve become a lot more spontaneous and adventurous about things, I love new experiences too-but even with these things I still think about how I’ll get it to work, what the possible repercussions will be, exactly what I need to do to accomplish things, etc., so Judging would make sense for my personality. I do actually do tons of research on most things beforehand, sometimes I’ll get lazy and “just do it” but I almost always (2/?)

go into something with at least a little foreknowledge. I also make decisions with my head, so for that reason it seemed like it made sense for me to have thinking as my dominant judging function, because I always choose the most logical option/what will yield the best result, sometimes based on what has worked in the past. But I’m not against new suggestions, because I look at what will work the best or yield the best result as I said before. But I will lean towards things that have worked(3/?)

before if they seem to be the best solution. I didn’t think I could be a Thinking dominant because for me there’s no way I could have inferior Feeling, which is why the stackup of a Perceiving function followed by Thinking and Feeling made sense-because I always check in with my values/feelings before making a decision but always rely on objective logic first-which I’ve heard is a staple of Te vs Ti subjective logic. But if I completely disagree with the morality of a choice I won’t do it.(4/?)

Basically, I’ll always find a way to make things work unless it’s absolutely impossible. Im pretty stubborn. I’m dependable and if I say I will do something I always do it. I have a good memory and I remember minor things my friends or people in my life tell me for a long time, just little details. I always need details when someone is telling me a story, or relaying something that happened, because I like to know specifics and analyze them. I strictly adhere to external logic when analyzing(5/?

(Im starting from where I think I left off bc tumblr wasn’t sending them) But if I completely disagree with the morality of a choice I won’t do it. Basically, I’ll always find a way to make things work unless it’s absolutely impossible. Im pretty stubborn. I’m dependable and if I say I will do something I always do it. I have a good memory and I remember minor things my friends or people in my life tell me for a long time, just little details. I always need details (6?/?)

and specifics and analyze them. I strictly adhere to external logic when analyzing things too, like my conclusions need to match up with the objective logic I use. I’m not much for rules or traditions like most ISTJ stereotypes go, but stereotypes are just that and aren’t what’s important to look at when typing. I have certain traditions that I appreciate but I’m almost always open to an adventure or new experience. I like the idea of making new memories as well, and I love learning new things.(7/?)

Idk how much of the last asks even sent, ugh. Anyway: I’m aware of my surroundings; I mean I can get lost in my own world or distracted like anybody else but my mood is heavily influenced by my environment. I get “vibes” from an environment and just kind of feel like they’re good or bad. Oftentimes a “good” vibe will be something that invokes a positive memory or experience, but it can also just be because it’s pleasant in some way. My comfort is important to me and I like to be in touch (8/?)

I can be spontaneous, but I’m not reckless because I always think things through at least preliminarily. I just believe in seizing the moment and making the most of an experience, so I love “adrenaline junkie” activities. Usually that’s an Se stereotype, it’s something I can relate to but I wouldn’t call myself impulsive because I analyze pretty much everything. I just have noticed that I can be more adventurous than my Se dom friend, which is interesting. But it’s all about how one thinks.(8/?)

For the zillionth time my tumblr was acting all wack and idk how many parts of my ask sent, so let’s hope they did... I’m aware of my surroundings; I mean I can get lost in my own world or distracted like anybody else but my mood is heavily influenced by my environment. I get “vibes” from an environment and just kind of feel like they’re good or bad. Oftentimes a “good” vibe will be something that invokes a positive memory or experience, but it can also just be because it’s pleasant somehow(8?/?

My comfort is important to me and I like to be in touch with my 5 senses, always. I often pick up on details other people miss but I can be as oblivious as anyone else on a bad day. I would consider myself a fairly intuitive person, but definitely not an abstract iNtuitive-type. Im just pretty perceptive about things, it’s something those close to me always tell me. I get senses or vibes from people when I meet them, and I’ve had plenty of experiences where I’ll get a certain vibe from (9/?)

mom sometimes, but that could be due to maturity. I used to think I was an iNtuitive, but I realized I am actually most likely a sensor who was mistyped thanks to bad descriptions due to intuitive bias. I know the only real difference is Sensing focuses on the here/now and the past, drawing on resources and memory, and using concrete, linear thinking, likes details and being in touch with surroundings, etc. I really dislike abstract thinking and I always need practical real life examples (10/?)

applications in order for me to care. I like the abstract symbolism in art, music, etc. And in that sense I like to determine what the real meaning is. So I don’t hate abstractions but they’re not my favorite, so an Ne weak spot in that department would make a lot of sense for me. I just hate abstract theories on things that have no real use or meaning to me. I also know that an “I” type doesn’t always mean one is a true introvert because it’s all about functions, but I’m almost positive I(11/?)

am one because I’m definitely an introvert and my primary thought process is always done internally. I’ve done so much research on mbti and enneagram, which my friend also thought could be due to wanting to discover my true identity, which I’ve heard is an enneagram 4 thing. Discovering my identity is very important to me. Obviously I’m not an expert, I’m just a person who wants to understand themself and has researched and read a lot to be able to do that (12/?)

There’s definitely parts of personality theory that I don’t know, but I definitely know more than anyone else I know personally in my life, it’s kind of become a hobby I guess. I just really want to know my type, not to flaunt it like some badge of honor for being a super “rare” or “cool” type; I want to know so I can grow as a person and understand myself and how I think and make decisions so I can see my reasoning and improve myself. Anyway I hope this info helps, I love your blog (13/14)

and thanks for taking the time to read all this horrific mess. (14/14)

---------------------------------------

I wrote a much longer response but it was very piecemeal as these came through.

In short: my guess would be SFP, either ISFP or ESFP.

Reasoning: I think in your attempts to avoid intuitive stereotypes you fell into a whole lot of stereotypes about Se that led you not to type as using it even though you seem very clearly a high Se user to me. You don’t provide many specific examples, ironically enough (eg: a lot of people say they get vibes, but there is a difference between ‘I regularly guess information about people that they are shocked I could figure out’ and ‘I can tell when people are sad sometimes’ and people use ‘vibes’ for both), so Ti vs. Fi is more difficult as you don’t really provide examples of your logic and there’s a lot of tautology. That said your motivations for MBTI as true identity (which...it is not your true identity, please do not think of any personality theory as such, they’re all generic archetypes of your identity) seem more in line with Fi as do some other things. Some observations:

-most people think their actions through to some extent. Some more than others but even spontaneous Ne and Se users have like, a thought and don’t just leap blindly. You don’t really provide an example here of your planning or your adventurousness.

-”I make decisions with my head” and “I always choose the most logical option” are actually signs to me that you don’t have a great sense of self-awareness. No one always chooses the most logical option unless they’re a robot. We all do irrational things sometimes, and honestly, how do you even decide what’s more logical in a lot of decisions?

-while it is true that Te uses objective logic and Ti uses subjective logic, people are very bad at telling which they use - which isn’t a judgment on them or you, but it also means that if someone says “I use objective logic” it doesn’t really mean anything. You need to tell me what decisions you make that are objective.

-If you have moral stances but do things that completely contradict them...then you don’t have moral stances, you just say you do. So this is tautological.

-Lots of people can be stubborn; dependability is more stereotypically judgers but I’ve met some exceptionally reliable perceivers; it’s a learned skill that smart people learn to develop regardless of type.

-contrary to stereotype, while some Si-doms do have a great memory (I think mine is better than average) plenty don’t; the capacity to remember details is more sensing because of the detail-oriented nature.

-similar to the objective logic statement it would be helpful to understand what you mean by external logic.

-being always open to an adventure or new experience is not really likely in high Si users until they’re pretty old. I mean, I am as discussed in the midst of a bunch of new experiences and while I’ve moved and started new jobs/school a few times and am used to it I am still kind of constantly fighting the urge to just hide in my new apartment (not having wifi in it is ‘helping’). The fact that you also are an adrenaline junkie is really not typical of Si-doms at all.

-Finally: introversion. Your writing style strikes me as extroverted. You don’t provide examples. I would need to know more about what you mean by “your thought process is internal” because like, that is what thoughts are - internal. Extroverts still have a full inner monologue.

My guess is you’re a type 4 ESFP who is in the midst of tert-Te development and so you are currently identifying very strongly with logic and productivity. However, it’s also very possible you’re an organized ISFP; my ISFP sister is one of those. As mentioned a lot of people realize that being flaky isn’t really a good look; a lot of SFPs are also very practical (high Se) and place a high value on reliability as a moral trait or identity trait. I find the nature of Fi and Ti is such that it’s really hard for people who use them to always know which one they use because they’re so subjective by nature; high Fi users often see their moral decisions as logical and high Ti users often see their logical decisions as also moral (unless they are of the edgy, “I have no morals” sort).

[thewolfmancometh]

Lords of Chaos (2018) [REVIEW]

You know how you might be scrolling through the internet and you see friends and acquaintances participating in something and your immediate reaction is, “Ugh, I can’t believe these people, I’ll never be caught DEAD doing that because I am too cool for it and would rather do this OTHER thing which will make me look INFINITELY cooler when other people see me doing it!” Well, now imagine you like metal, live in Norway, and it’s the ’90s. Well, if that’s the case, you’ll end up creating a musical style that is “darker” and “more evil” than everything anyone else is playing, which you’ll call “black metal.” Oh, and if you are so committed to this “cause” that you murder people, then you’re the characters in Lords of Chaos, which explores the burgeoning black metal scene, specifically through the eyes of the real-life musicians responsible for Mayhem and Burzum. Lords of Chaos is a twisted and compelling exploration of posers who define themselves by being edgier than their peers and who are so detached from reality that they don’t realize that they’re the ones putting up a front yet have the privilege and means to “fake it ’til they make it.”

Fans of this blog will know that this is usually the part where I describe the plot, yet the plot is so bananas that it must be seen to be believed. Making matters more interesting is that, while some details are dramatized, the more horrific and shocking elements are lifted from the actual metal scene in Norway, which you could learn about through a quick Wikipedia browse. Let’s just say there are murders, suicides, animal sacrifices, church burnings, and young boys trying to look scary by painting their faces with makeup.

You might notice that I’ve categorized this film as both a “horror movie” and also a “non-horror movie.” Pretty weird, huh? Allow me to explain! The film isn’t horrifying in the traditional sense in that there’s some sort of serial killer or supernatural force that motivates the narrative, so in that regard, it’s definitely not a horror movie. However, the events that unfold are deeply unsettling, not only in its depictions of horrible violence, but also in the ways these privileged youths compose themselves and will rattle you to your core. The narrative, as well as the true-life events that inspired it, is a game of one-upmanship that leads our characters to commit disturbing things.

What makes director Jonas Åkerlund‘s depictions of this story so effective is that he never tries to make the characters look cool, because they, well, aren’t. While there is surely an air of mystique to how such a bizarre subgenre of music came together, what with the images of bands wearing corpse paint and what seems to be an infatuation with the devil, the director makes it quite clear that these kids chose to wear corpse paint and worship the devil, really for no other reason than to fabricate an image of themselves that would inspire this mystique. Decades later, there are still people intimidated by such figures, with Lords of Chaos showing that the founders of this “movement” were as insecure as anyone.

Another strength of the film is that, while we might relate to feelings of teenage angst or depression, Åkerlund focuses on empathy over sympathy. These kids (who become adults throughout the film) are frustrated by all of the things every teen must encounter in their adolescence, yet it appears as though no one was around to keep them in check. We can feel bad for someone struggling with depression, sure, but when they reveal that they like to kill cats as performative evil, we stop caring about how their journey turns out. The acts of violence, sadism, and racism are all injected into the story with appropriate timing to snap you back to reality when you begin to feel sorry for the characters and these acts are depicted objectively, as these assholes really were that awful, regardless of whether or not you liked the sounds their musical instruments made.

Here’s the thing: the story of the founding of Mayhem and the birth of black metal is an intrinsically Norwegian story, so when the film begins and the American actors are speaking in very American accents, it’s a little…jarring. Days later, I’m still trying to come to grips with this. Take a movie like David Fincher’s Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, for example, where all of the actors put on phony Swedish accents while speaking English, only for various signage around the scenery to be written in Swedish. Kinda weird, but the movie is meant to be more accessible to American audiences than the original films and it at least makes sense that this authenticity had to be sacrificed. Having all of these Norwegian characters speaking without a hint of an accent, only for various ancillary characters to show up and speak with Norwegian accents took me out of the experience multiple times. Admittedly, this could be another way that the director wanted to make the central characters stand out from the rest of their community, subconsciously showing how these protagonists never fit in, but you, too, might just be thrown off by the whole thing and raise an eyebrow when Rory Culkin says, “True Norwegian black metal,” in perfect American. I couldn’t help but wish Scandinavian actors could have been found for the necessary roles, with this core component making the film feel more committed to accessibility than to authenticity. There’s also the argument that this adds another layer to the performative nature of the narrative, but I think I’m just talking myself in circles at this point and you can see what I’m getting at.

While I can’t say anyone will enjoy watching Lords of Chaos, it’s a fascinating exploration of a unique time in metal’s history, in addition to delivering a cautionary tale of leading a performative life. If you feel evil, be evil, but don’t be evil just because you want to prove you’re more evil than anyone else, because then you will become the ultimate poser and might as well put on your corpse paint to go to the mall.

Wolfman Moon Scale

via WordPress http://bit.ly/2BvvYxD

[biwomensupport]

i saw your post on reactionary abuse a few months back and have a question. the person who raped me has been out of my life for many years, and only recently have i come to terms with what happened. i have 1 friend who knows and i feel ive been abusing her. when im flashing back or struggling with the trauma+talking to her, all my fears and doubts and traumatic feelings rise up and i lash out at her and treat her terribly, like i dont trust her or believe she cares. (1/2)

(2/2) is reactionary abuse a thing against the person who wasnt your abuser, even if that abuse is what youre reacting to? i dont know if im just trying to excuse what im doing to her with my trauma, or if its reactionary abuse? (i know it being reactionary abuse doesnt excuse my actions either, its a horrific coping mechanism im trying to work past. im just trying to make sense of everything lately)

ABUSE TW BELOW.

Hi Anon,

No, this is not reactionary abuse. This is you being abusive.

If you actually read through the post you refer to it is more than clear what you are doing is not reactive abuse. You are not acting to avoid/survive abuse but to gain control over someone else. It even says right there in the post: “Make sure, most importantly, that you aren’t continuing this behavior beyond the scope of your relationship with your abuser”. 

Reactive abuse refers exclusively to people who ‘snap’ back directly at their abusers in some way such as screaming at them, insulting them, etc, in ways that are far outside their usual behavior and rather mimic the behavior of their abuser. It is a maladaptive coping mechanism used while the abuse is going on, not many years later in a completely different context. It is not a pattern of abuse and it does not apply to abusing other people.

A minority of people who have been abused do go on to reproduce that abuse and become abusers themselves. A minority. Having been abused does not force someone to abuse others. In addition, you say you have come to terms with your trauma. If you have come to terms with it, it is doubly true that it cannot be used as a reason or an excuse to abuse someone else. 

I noticed that you said you have been abusing someone, but used distancing language such as “I feel I have been” and “I’m just trying to make sense of everything” even though the reality is very clear. The very fact that you are only treating one friend this way shows you have both control and awareness over your actions. You are an abuser, and you know exactly how you are being abusive- you said yourself you “lash out at her and treat her terribly”. There are a million and one things you could do when you feel any way at all. Instead you have chosen to abuse.

You can say you know that you cannot excuse your actions, and yet you are trying to in this very ask by saying, ‘yes, I am abusing her (even this you say indirectly), BUT it is because I went through X and feel Y’. There is no ‘yes, but’. The context of abuse does not matter. There is NO context which makes it less abusive or more acceptable. In addition, you cannot “work past” being abusive. You will not be applauded for being on a progressively ‘lower’ end of the abuse spectrum. All abuse is harmful and you either abuse or you don’t, full stop.

I am very sorry for your trauma. But you will not find any sympathy for your abuse, and I find it very telling that this question asked nothing about how to stop being abusive but rather is entirely focused on how to label the abuse as something else. 

This is a blog for survivors of abuse only. It is not for abusers. You will not find the resources you are looking for here. If you are serious about not being abusive, you need to own up to it fully, remove yourself from this person’s life (and not in a way that makes you look like a hero for doing so), and attend abuser rehabilitation. 

For the record, this was answered to show readers how abusers speak about abuse and how one can analyze that language to see the message underneath. Please do not message us again.

BWSN