#i usually got emotionally invested in those male characters BECAUSE of how they related to the female character i adored

[elialys]

during one of my many existential crises relating to me writing original fiction (and failing at it), it has dawned on me that i need to start writing sapphic stories.

because i've also realized the main reason why i can never create male characters interesting enough for me to want to *write* about them extensively is that i just...don't care??? 😂

like, seriously

[mssapphire]

Being emotionally responsible: what the hell does that mean? or answering ‘what have you got to offer?’

This post was intended to be a draft because I had some cohesive thoughts looping around my head and I thought it’d be nice to write them down so I could come back to them when I did decide to write a Serious Post (Serious Post like Serious Steven) about it, but I got carried away and the Serious Post just happened.

When you move around non-monogamous circles there’s a phrase that tends to be repeated (but not thoroughly explained, because that’s not what Insta is for): “it’s not about how many people you’re with (simultaneously), it’s about how many people you can actually care for/take care of”, which is a nice way to phrase what is also called “sexo-affective responsibility”. Let’s unpack that.

To me, that’s nothing but a fancier way of saying that you need to know your own limitations and how much capacity and room you actually have in your life to sustain relationships healthily (re: having the time is not the same as having capacity). It’s also based on a very simple common sense principle: you need to relate consciously to people. You should know yourself enough to be aware of your needs and wants, and invest the time and effort in those people who can actually help you grow and heal - and this is not something that just happens spontaneously, but something you think about, weigh, ponder, consider and decide to do.

Giving yourself that time and space to properly assess your capacity is what is going to allow you to decide what type of relationships you should have. And, if you do your homework right, you’ll understand sooner rather than later that there is a lot of bullshit we don’t need in relationships. That there are relationships not worth having, or that we insist we want one thing when in actuality we need something else. It’s like the person who compulsively has as much sex as possible, without stopping to unpack why they do that and why they want that. Or the person who keeps making romantic connections because they have no idea how to make sustainable, basic friendships. 

And yet time and time again you see people in these circles, particularly but not exclusively cis men, who think they understand this, or at least they agree with everything in theory, but they leave nothing but a wake of broken hearts in their path. It’s what I call “out of control steamrollers” (una aplanadora sin frenos). 

So, what gives? Where is the disconnect? Why do these guys keep doing this, so much so that it’s A Thing, a trope, inside the community? Is it because they’re evil? unlikely. Is it because they’re stupid? also, unlikely. Is it because they have loads of male privilege and are taking advantage of the situation so they can have as much sex as they want, while successfully making the bare minimum emotional investment and at the same time scoring Woke Points because they’re “challenging monogamy”? well, I’d say yes, this is definitely the case. But at the same time, it’s something they’re usually unaware of. And thus it’s a behavior that’s very hard for them to change. Because, even if they’re confronted with it (and if they’re adults, I am sure they have been, plenty of times) - they just don’t see themselves that way.

I have personally dealt with these types. All of them lovely guys in their own way. Guys I loved, and still do. But hot damn, so freaking immature. And I think it’s worth sharing that at some point in our relationships, where I was feeling emotionally neglected and uncared for, I confronted them about it. Of course they insisted they cared about me, and sure, why not, I’m sure they did. But a question I like to throw out there in these discussions, and that always catches them off guard is: what have you got to offer me in this relationship?

And they never know how to answer. And I understand - they have never had to ask themselves this question. And here’s my take on why: I think in society men are raised to believe that just by fact of being themselves that’s enough to be in relationship. In fact, this is the knee jerk reaction I usually get: “I’m a good guy! I’m not a terrible person!” - and I am sure they are, that’s not what I’m asking. But they immediately feel it as very personal criticism. As if you were telling them they’re less than. And that’s not the point

When you are in relationship with other people, the dynamic is supposed to be mutual and reciprocal. You can be a great person, but that doesn’t mean you have the mental space to be in relationship, or even the tools and skills to healthily relate to others. This is what I like to call Emotional Illiteracy - why? because it’s something you can learn. You can learn to be empathetic, to listen and communicate better. You can learn about attachment styles and why people relate the way they do when they’re in a loving relationship (platonic, romantic, familiar). But men don’t think that’s something they’re supposed to learn, because that’s un-manly. Emotions are things for women, not for men!

And the thing is that in society, women are raised to be caretakers and empathetic and to put other people’s needs ahead of their own. Am I saying that all women are sensitive and great in relationship while every guy is emotionally stunted and will never truly love anyone? of course not. What I’m saying is that men who don’t proactively question these structures and who seek out help and actually take the time to learn (and unlearn) are probably going to do a lot of damage... they don’t even want to do, but that they’ll be emotionally responsible for non the less. And yes, we all have things to learn, like what relationships are systematically unequal and should thus be avoided, but I think when it comes to love, men are more in the woods.

Personally, I think Bell Hooks’ definition of love is the most accurate I’ve ever seen: love is not just a feeling you have for someone, it’s a verb - it’s the things you do to grow and nurture the relationship, motivated by that feeling. Feelings alone are no base for a relationship - feelings change. But action based on connection, and a willingness to be vulnerable and heal and connect with someone else, is what is going to give you solid relationships that will stand the test of time. 

But in hetereopatriarchal society, men are taught that their attraction to women, and that alone, is what is going to reward them with a relationship. After all, men do the desiring, and women are the objects of their desire. Time, and time again, I’ve met guys whose only interactions with me boiled down to telling me how attractive they found me. And, sure, that’s nice and all. But that is not actually connecting and setting the grounds for love to grow. And there’s a common misconception where we confuse desire and admiration with love (explained in this post), because we have no idea what love actually is.

Love is being seen, known, heard and understood. And love actions are those actions centered around making the other person feel (say it with me) seen, known, heard and understood. That means making the effort of really getting to know someone. To discover their history, their inner world, to uncover trauma together - and then, by virtue of sharing time and experiences together, provide space for emotional wounds to heal. Love is not fixing someone else’s brokenness, it’s understanding them just enough so they feel safe and less alone, which is something that will nurture them into self-healing.

And this all sounds like extremely hard work - like dangerous work even. We are not taught to be vulnerable, we’re not taught to be in a healthy relationship with ourselves, let alone with others. But understanding just how much of an impact we can have on people around us, for the better or for the worse, is what’s actually going to allow us to make responsible decisions.

When we fail to do all of this work, and engage in relationships impulsively, we’re doing nothing but engaging in capitalistic consumerism of bodies and emotions (another post I intend to write). Where we are using people only to provide us with pleasure or comfort, until things get too difficult and we toss them aside and move on to our next victim (in polyamory circles they call this ‘new relationship energy’ - the rush you get when you start any loving relationship, which can be addictive). Needless to say, but: this is unfair and irresponsible.

And irresponsible, rampant, consumerism not only applies to sex, but to emotions as well (you can be abusive and exploitative in non-sexual relationships too, you know). When we don’t show up emotionally and leave the other person to do all the emotional labor in the relationship - we are using them. Coming to someone just when we need their support and their shoulder to cry on or, worse, when we need someone to give us a solution to our problems, is deeply exploitative and immature.

That’s why it’s so important to have an integral relationship with ourselves. If we are self-destructive, un-self-aware, selfish, prone to instant gratification, and in no place whatsoever to actually care for other people (or, in other words, emotionally immature) - then we really shouldn’t be in relationship. Like the character of Darryl says on the episode of Hunters Without a Home of The Midnight Gospel: according to Tibetan views, love is how happy you can make another person. That is answering the question: what have you got to offer them in relationship? 

The reason why this is such a hard question to answer, I think, it’s because we’re afraid to look inside and find ourselves empty, without anything of real value to offer. And, again, please don’t confuse ‘offering value’ with offering hedonistic pleasure, status, or material things. In the end, as human beings, we all have a necessity to love and be loved - to be interconnected. And I find it appalling and devastating that we live in a society that has made us believe that our actual worth is outside of us, or that ‘we don’t owe each other anything’ or that ‘we shouldn’t have any expectations’ (this relates to a hook up culture that has convinced us that sex is the best and only thing we’ve got to offer, again, another post I intend to write eventually).

No matter what relationship model you choose to practice (monogamy, polyamory, relationship anarchy, open relationships), if you are emotionally illiterate you will only engage in consumerism of bodies and people. And one of the best things you could ever do for your own sake and other’s is to actually make the effort and learn.

Anyway, it’s 2am and my brain has ran out of juice, so forgive me if the conclusion isn’t better articulated. But, there you go!

Edit: here’s a shorter, bullet point version I had already written and which I had forgotten about.

[atrainernamedradish]

Top 5 Least Favorite Rivals

5) Kalos Rivals [Pokemon X & Y]

Don’t get me wrong: I like the idea of having a group of friends setting out on their Pokemon journey together. That’s a wonderful idea! My issue is, however, the way it was executed… I have just moved to a new region and have four other kids already clambering at my doorstep to get to know me and befriend me. As someone is very introverted and socially awkward… that would not sit well with me. 

Not to mention there is clearly one that is romantically interested in me trying to be better at me at battling as well as with pretty much everything on my journey. Which, sorry neighbor, but not no, but hell no! I’ve got better things then hang out with someone who’s already sizing me up thinking that they’re better than me, and trying to make me feel bad for always kicking their ass! Fuck off Serena/Calem!

Then you have the other one who also has a crush on you, especially if you’re the male character: Shauna! The fireworks scene in the storyline wants to come off sweet and enduring when in reality it comes off creepy! Like… sweetie, we’ve only known each other for not that long, I am not interested in you. If they would have toned this back a little, I would have liked Shauna more, oh well.

Trevor annoyed me so much! I don’t care about the Pokedex, and stop crying every time I’ve seen more Pokemon then you in it! If you cared so much about the damn ‘dex then why haven’t you worked as hard on it as the game claims you have, for fuck sake! Every time you are on the screen I want you gone! Oy!

Tierno was the rival I actually liked the most. He actually had a personality that wasn’t creepy or annoying. My only gripe with him is that he talked about having a fucking dancing team, and had no members to speak of that looked to fit the part! I think in the anime he had a Ludicolo, which is something he should have had on his team, but as always in each new game they are trying to push the new Pokemon so hard that they fuck up a character’s team doing so…

4) May/Brendan [Ruby & Sapphire; Emerald; Omega Ruby & Alpha Sapphire] & Dawn/Lucas [Diamond & Pearl; Platinum]

You know what’s really annoying? Having a rival of the opposite gender who is pretentious and egotistical because they have a teeny bit experience over you, but is weaker than they realize pretty much being filler wasting your time in the game’s storyline.

These are the assholes that started that trope of the “nice” weak rival that has implied romantic interest in you. What a waste of character space in my opinion… As much shit as I gave the Kalos rivals, at least they had some personality compared to these boring carbon copies of each other these four are... 

3) Hop [Pokemon Sword & Shield]

Put away your pitchforks, and hear me out before you mob me! I don’t necessarily hate the character itself. I hate how he conflicts with the usual formula for Pokemon games.

He talks a lot about how he’ll follow in his brother’s footsteps and become the next champion. He thinks of you starting out as someone he has an edge over always acting surprised when you know even the basics of Pokemon and battling. He tries so hard not to let you know that always whooping his ass bothers him, but it does every single time.

The game tries to introduce this champion successor that has done as this research who already has a Pokemon when you first battle them. But even then the usual formula contradicts them. They choose the weaker starter allowing you to beat them so easily! And then have the audacity to be surprised by the results!

Then when Bede beats them, which how the fuck do you lost to a single type specialist who hasn’t been training that long Hop?! You can’t feel sorry for him because he was doomed to fial from the start! Game Freak already had him precoded to get his ass beat by you over and over again, despite the story claiming otherwise! There was no damned reason why Hop was in the finals with you! To be honest, it wouldn’t surprise me if his matches were rigged because he was related to the champion!

Hop had no business being cocky throwing around his brother’s title then feeling sorry for himself when he lost. I just can’t invest in this character. He is a knockoff Hau if Hau actually gave a shit, which they failed at doing in USUM. Even Hau was more of a challenge and someone I was more emotionally invested in…

Game Freak, if you’re going to try and spin this try hard rival that’s in the shadows of their better sibling then make it believable. Your own formula fucked up a perfectly good character arc and it shows. By this point in my second playthrough I was rooting Bede on to kick Hop’s ass again. That’s how little I care about him.

2) Cheren [Black & White; Black 2 & White 2]

I am about to get soooo much hate for this! Oh well…

You know what drives me crazy? Having to be stopped every 5 fucking seconds by my annoying childhood friend who doubles as my rival because we just beat the local gym leader, and he has to see who is the better trainer telling me how strong he is and how strong he wants to see how I’ve become since the last battle, and how he wants to be the champion of the region, and then when I beat him he will be surprised I won and how he needs to get stronger to beat me, and rinse and repeat. Every. Single. TIME! Like… Cheren… FUCK OFF! Let me having so fucking breathing room!

1) Hugh [Black 2 & White 2]

You know what’s worse than what Cheren was doing above? Take Cheren, make him angrier and jaded, give him an attitude problem and make him whiny, have him obsessed with Team Plasma, and you have Hugh.

I’ve got better things to do then be friends with a guy who thinks he can talk to me however he pleases who tries to boss me around and act like he’s better than me. Like, Hugh, honey, grow the fuck up and see a therapist. I hate when games give me friends/rivals like these because I don’t like them. I would never associate with people like this in real life. As much as I would want to whoop the shit out of someone like this, it takes less stress and time to just not be around them and save me the headache. He was the worst experience for me in Black 2 & White 2, and those are some of my favorite games in the series, to give you an idea. I hate this guy.

[kuragecharms]

One(1) whole ramble about being INTJ

It’s weird to watch videos about INTJs from the perspectives of other types, in all honesty. Sometimes it feels as if there is a whole lot of very shallow stereotyping going on, other times it hits the nail right on the head and I’m laughing. 

Of course, MBTI is not a personality quiz, it’s a thought type indicator. But there ARE some common shared experiences. So I guess it’s nice sometimes to realize that others have the same struggles as yourself. I’m gonna talk a bit about some common categories and labels placed on INTJs, and kind of...rant about my experiences with (or without) them. :>

The INTJ “death glare”

One thing that almost always gets thrown in on some sort of comment is the “infamous INTJ death stare.” I realized this about myself over a decade before I even heard the term MBTI breathed aloud, in all honesty it was a big stumbling block.

My natural instinct is direct eye contact. I don’t naturally show a lot of emotion on my face, etc. It’s a learned behavior because honestly, it’s more efficient to fit into some social status quos in order to be understood better, right? Saying it that directly can sound cold or calculating to some people, but it’s the truth, as far as I’m concerned. The whole “just be yourself!” thing works.... IF you are naturally charismatic or have a grasp on socialization tactics. Or if you are surrounded by people who can more naturally understand you. But for a rare type, for a highly introverted, independent, often over-opinionated blunt speaking female? The truth of the matter is, no matter who I’m dealing with, there’s some level of adjustment going on. I think that’s why i was drawn to languages from a young age. The prospect of conveying complex thought in another venue entirely was appealing to me. Being understood is a goal. I picked out patterns of speech from the internet, from books, from those around me, and would apply them (often quite consciously) in order to get my points across. In debate forums, I was often praised mostly for my ability to convey what others had been thinking, but in a clear to understand format. That was because it was my whole goal.

I remember being really young, like...less than ten? I think I was about 6-7 years old. When my parents would rebuke me for something I’d done, I would sometimes cry. That’s not a necessarily strong stereotype for INTJs, but it does happen. I felt things really deeply, and never knew how to grapple with them when a strong emotion interrupted my play, so that’s the best I can describe it as. Eventually, I got told to stop crying so much, so I would steel myself for such rebukes. Now, my natural instinct is to meet someone’s eyes. I know this, even though sometimes I doubt it because of the strength of my learned behavior. But I distinctly remember BOTH of my parents pausing in the middle of getting after me to say, “Why are you looking at me like that?!” and I would ask, “Like what?” They usually didn’t have a very good description of what the look was, but the gist of it was, I suppose, that it looked like I was judging them. I don’t know why this bothered them so much, because at the time I wasn’t usually striving to be petulant (although on occasion the look came about when I was thinking about the unfairness of my punishment). My mother (INFJ) was particularly bothered by it, especially because she was the more involved parent. Sometimes, it really seemed to throw her off, to the point that we got off the topic of the immediate punishment, and I was told to watch my attitude on things. Which, in retrospect, is fair. You don’t want an egotistical child. But I was confused because I didn’t see it that way. The world was always one to question, and my mother raised me with that philosophy, but there was a limit to it that I hadn’t felt out quite yet.

I did understand, though, that my expression was discomfiting to some. It happened with more frequency, often with my siblings. My younger INFP sibling would sometimes cry when I would look at her with any strength of feeling, and say that I was glaring or judging. Very rarely was this intentional, I promise.

When I reached high school, I would sometimes examine my own expression in the mirror or in photos. I don’t think mine is a very harsh face in general, so the accusations were confusing. But I decided I needed to adjust. It was easier, not only to avoid the ‘glare’ of judgement, but also to control my own emotions, if I didn’t make too much eye contact. I started to deliberately look away from people’s faces after a few seconds, because I wanted them to know I was listening, but also that I wasn’t focusing in too harshly in order to judge them personally. It seems to work, so it’s something I’ve kept with.

But lately, I’ve been wanting to focus on being truer to myself, and get back to the roots of my own natural self, and re-establish myself with the added information I’ve learned over the years. I want to make eye contact, even if it seems intense. My natural instinct is part of who I am. If I’m truly engaged by a topic, my learned behaviors weaken, and I realize I make much eye contact. I lean in and I pay 100% attention to the conversation at hand. The majority of the time, I don’t make eye contact at all, both because of my investment in the topic but also my gauging of how much eye contact I can make with the other party without infringing on their comfort level. I want to care about this less. I’m well aware I can be too intense of a personality for some, so I can withhold or gauge myself in most instances. But with this, I think I should be allowed a little more natural habit.

The Know-It-All/”Too Smart”

In uni, I wasn’t AFRAID to answer questions, but I rarely did after the first semester. I was just being myself and came across as a know-it-all or pompous, because I was nervous and focused on the class material, which some people weren’t (admittedly, it was gen eds, so it isn’t a commonly attractive set of courses anyways). I started setting goals before each class, like, “You should only answer three questions at most for this class.” and such like that. It wasn’t really to make others like me, as I already had established that reputation and I didn’t make moves to change it. But it was because I had to adjust, to improve, to better blend in.

When I DID answer questions, half the time it was to help other classmates. I’d look around and realize others weren’t getting what the professor was saying, so I’d raise my hand and state something like, “When you say X...do you mean that Y?” and I would elaborate Y as a more relatable, easier to digest phrasing or simile. The professor would often be a bit confused, but I’ve literally heard classmates around me go, “Ohhhhhh” with realization. Things went a bit smoother after that. I was seen as studious, but less pompous.

I’ve never thought of intelligence or logic being partial to female or male, or emotions being preferred by female or male, until I interacted and socialized more. Naturally, my instinct is to not distinguish. I grew up homeschooled, in a family where the boys and girls boy cooked and cleaned and cried, and we were ALL avid readers. My natural tendency to debate was often rebutted by my older brother, and I saw us on equal ground.

In middle school, I saw the huge difference in the way my father treated my brother and I (we’re both INTJs) and how hard this was on him. He was told not to have emotions, and for an INTJ? We already struggle enough with this. Being told not to cry at much, after all, instigated a huge self-study in my own expression and aura. 

Looking back, I was pretty naive about it. I wanted to prove myself as strong as my father and brother. I did this physically (my relatives know me to be the girl who pushes in to help move furniture. It’s caused some pretty sexist debates, in all honesty) emotionally and psychologically. I wanted to prove that there was no difference between my brother and I, and I tried very, very hard.

I’ve since come to terms with the fact that the difference in treatment had more to do with my father’s underlying sexism and not much to do with my own competency, or my brother’s. I’ve accepted my own strengths and still see us as equals, and I have nothing to prove to anyone else in regards to that. Rather than proving anyone wrong about me, I do it because it’s efficient and positive to take care of things on my own and for the sake of my own independence.

I’ve been told, however, that I’m “too smart” for a girl. I’ve been literally told that I’ll scare men off with my words. I’m normally quiet, in person. But when broaching a topic of some knowledge or interest, I will instantly just explode with thoughts or theories, discussion and debates. I’ve exchanged 2-3 messages with a person before going off on a multi-paragraph rant (via text) about MBTI and its common misconceptions.I’m just like that. I don’t see it as showing off my intelligence but an opportunity to engage with others in a mutually educational environment.

Again, I see myself as not having anything to prove. I’m no astrophysicist. I suck at math. I’m good at English. I like talking about things I’m interested in, but I know when I’m not an expert or have insufficient knowledge. But it can be very disheartening to know that just being my natural self and actually being engaged without holding back constantly is seen as an attack on someone else’s ego, or that I’m scaring people off. I want to engage with ideas and such. If everyone is intimidated by me, with my speech and my eye contact, then those opportunities are lost. 

I know what I know, so I feel confident. But I also know how much I do NOT know, so I feel humbled and eager to learn. I don’t see that as a character flaw, although many would paint it as cockiness.

INTJ’s organization/strictness

It’s another common trope. I’ll see people talk about INTJs being rigid about things, unable to admit that they’re wrong, distant or set in their ways, liking the routine. I find some of this true, but not most. Because this is getting a bit far into the personality side of things, rather than a thought type, the way that most people apply it.

Do I like things organized? Yes. Am I organized? Sometimes, just like anybody. Do I like to know what’s expected of me? Hell yes. Am I unable to adapt (for example, if I’m talking with someone more emotional )? That’s just limiting. As I said, socially speaking, I HAVE to adapt. I’m well aware of being the minority. Most people don’t wanna say, “Hello, let’s analyze film cinematography for fun” they wanna get to know each other on topics that I, frankly speaking, find dull. I have to fight to pay attention to half the conversations I have, I have to nod and make noises to acknowledge that I’m listening CONSTANTLY. That’s how it is. I can adapt. I’m not always as flexible as I’d like, and to err is human. But INTJs are box-people, I assure you. 

But man, do I fucking love spreadsheets. I love using succinct methods to help introduce others to MBTI, for instance. I have condensed explanations of the letters and typing help and such, all prepared. I have lists of people I’ve typed and it’s color-coded. It goes along with that efficiency of explaining to others my viewpoints. :> If I’m easy to understand through my words, I feel I’ve succeeded in a task.

I think the part where I get the most rigid and immovable, is when it comes to planning social time. I’m very withdrawn and I’ve discovered over the years that, even when I’ve learned to adjust, my ability to socialize is still very limited and EXTREMELY draining. Given that INTJs are, on the gradient scale, among the very utmost independent and introverted, this isn’t so surprising. I have to gear up for social interactions, and often this takes hours of mental prep. I spend most of my time on a computer, writing down my own thoughts or organizing things, rather than interacting. I keep my cell phone IN MY HAND during new situations and social events, almost the entire time. I’ve learned that if I can pull away and, say, check my messages or Twitter, it pulls my head out of the socializing (even if just for a few moments) and let me reassess and recharge a bit. Am I actually tired, or just need a bathroom break? Am I done for the night, or is my leaving a bit too premature? Constant interaction with anyone outside my immediate family is draining, even if I’m enjoying myself and having a good time. (With my family, I’m more blunt, easy going, and very positive, I think. I tend to be physically clingy and talk a LOT more freely) So I have to gauge myself, and I can feel myself getting overdrawn sometimes.

Even just running into someone by accident at the store can jolt my energy levels. I’ve been known to duck around corners if I see someone I know (even if I like them, generally speaking) because I wasn’t ready for an interaction, mentally.

Now, when I know what’s expected and how much socializing I need, I’m fine, and very dedicated. I had a monthly social meet up with my friends in Japan, and I liked that. I LOVED it, actually. I knew about how long I’d be out, when I was expected to show up, and once a month filled my social meter pretty well. It was with a close-knit group I could be fairly comfortable with, and my warmer sides had a chance to shine.

At work now, I’m garnering a reputation for being independent. I do my tasks early in the evening, usually, and then I’m fine being at my desk for 4-6 hours even if I don’t see or hear from a living soul. One coworker informed the shift manager that he didn’t even need to check up on me or anything, that I was perfectly fine on my own. It was stated like it was something worth note, although I saw it as natural. lol It was a bit amusing.

The organizing thing is kinda true, though. I recently decided to respond to a YouTube comment (a very, very rare experience) and I actually bullet-pointed my reasons why the original commenter was mistaken, in order to make myself more succinct. lol When I replied I had to laugh at my own actions.

Other/misc.

Among strangers, I rarely speak my own opinions or thoughts at any length. I can work in a place for a year and not reveal anything more than what is asked of me. This can cause problems. I often have a lot to share with others, whether it’s creatively or in theories or advice. I have many thoughts, but... my “efficiency” stamp and also my increasing self-awareness of others’ perceptions of me, holds a lot of this back. It’s not like I particularly blame anyone for this, it’s really my own decision.

But to me, I’d decided that if someone ASKS me about something, then they care enough to know the answer. If I mentioned my work once, and someone asks about it, I’ll answer them. If they want to know my thoughts or feelings on something, I don’t hesitate to start formulating a reply. I have a thought on MOST things. BUT, if I’m not asked? I assume it isn’t on their mind as vital enough to get an answer on. I wouldn’t want to bother elaborating a whole goddamn essay when they weren’t interested, right? That’s when I get the “Wow. lol You wrote a lot.” and no thoughtful response, which is disheartening when I want to exchange ideas and got excited or invested. 

So if they don’t ask, it’s not that I exactly hold onto it or get bitter. But I take that as data for gauging future conversations. If a friend of mine isn’t interested in a fact about me, I don’t offer similar data in the future.

For example, I don’t really do much to celebrate my birthday anymore. i explained to my mother that being the center of attention and getting a lot of OBLIGATORY wishes of good will is not how I feel special or loved. I’d rather get to sleep in, eat what I like, I’d rather spend quality time with people, or relax. Usually this means not going out or anything.

Now, if someone wishes me happy birthday? That’s fine. I don’t get a whole lot out of it, but... it’s still kinda nice? But I hate when people do it purely out of obligation. So my resolution to this was to remove my birthday from Facebook. The only people who wish me happy bday are those who already know me and that date, not because FB reminded them of an obligation. 

I have no problem telling people I’m a Capricorn or such, or a winter baby. But I usually don’t give the exact date of my bday because I don’t want others to feel pressured to remember it or care too much about it, or feel guilty if they missed it. If they ask when my birthday is? I’ll tell them. If the day comes, I don’t hide it. But I think that those who would genuinely care about wishing my happy birthday come along, that they’ll ask,and then I can offer that info. This kind of logic goes across the board, really.

To some people, this is seen as manipulative. I’ve been accused of ‘testing’ my friendships and their sincerity with this, or being passive aggressive. It’s not really my intent, but because of the accusation, I try to re-evaluate such behaviors and try to ensure that these truly ARE my reasonings, and not because I’m secretly seeking attention or validation. 

~~

It’s hard to be understood as an INTJ, I suppose. There’s a lot more than goes into this. I know MBTI isn’t a 100% thing (all psychology is a soft science, anyhow) but I like to use MBTI as a sort of helper, or key, in understanding commonly misunderstood behaviors in me. I know it’s helped me navigate social interactions a lot, and I’ve grown as a person because of it. 

One common problem I’ve had is...well... basically anything in the realms of emotion. That fucking Fi tertiary function, goddamn it. lol 

It’s hard to explain, but the easiest way I’ve found is to tell people that sometimes my emotions “are on a delay.” For example, I’ll go to an event with my friends - like a concert - and I don’t have much exterior emotions about it. My ESFP friend is literally jumping up and down and screaming, while I feel like all my enjoyment is trapped inside my body, and my body won’t move and dance too freely. I’d rather stand very still and enjoy the music, even if I’m having just as good a time. I’m too busy internalizing things to ‘let go’ as the ESFP would. lol

As another example, when I first went to a haunted house, I did enjoy my time there. But emotionally? I wasn’t sure until like two or three days later, when I was thinking back on it. I didn’t know if I’d go again, or if I had fun, or if I liked it. I knew the experience, as I’d lived it, but my FEELINGS on the matter didn’t get processed for a few days. This seems odd, I know. But it makes big emotional events that I get up to very hard to process. Going to Japan, I didn’t properly “feel” excited to be going until like a week after I got there. lol 

One sign that I’ve really enjoyed myself or am emotionally worked up, is that bc I don’t externalize it, I get a headache. After the haunted house, because I hadn’t screamed or let out any outward stress or emotions, everything was bottled in during processing, and I got a really intense headache from it. Recently, I met an online friend of mine in person for the first time, and I could tell I was excited, mostly because my head started hurting once I picked her up.

It’s hard to really explain what that sort of experience is like, but it’s the best I’ve come up with so far. My brain is still processing how I feel about things. This gets confusing when you’re having an argument with a friend. If I feel MORE emotional about a topic, I tend to withdraw and speak more bluntly, and more objectively. This irritates the fuck out of a lot of people, who think I’m shutting down on them. What’s really going on is that, I feel emotionally compromised, and I want to make the argument PRODUCTIVE and EFFICIENT. So I look for a solution to the issue, and doing so requires focusing on the facts, with the way my mind works. “Okay, so you feel the chores aren’t fair. What would you designate as a fair amount? Then who will take care of this?” It sounds accusatory, so I have to phrase things in questions, instead of demands, because I’m trying to find a solution, not attack. I don’t mind conflict, if it’s productive towards improving a situation. 

When I do get emotional? It’s a fucking mess. But even then, I often shut down the emotional side of things and bury it until I’ve processed it and can examine it later. This delay often means people are disappointed by my lack of reaction to certain things, or feel like I don’t care as much as I do. Which usually isn’t the case.

This also means that a lot of relationships, I’m focusing more on the benefits or chemistry of, and I guess that makes people put INTJs on a pedestal? I could elaborate on that and how it’s affected a lot of my relationships, resulting many times in friendships where the other person gets very dependent on me for affirmation or help, and feels closer to me than I feel to them. But... I guess that’s for another day. lol

Essentially, I guess, some stereotypes have their basis in the truth. But I feel like life as an INTJ is a lot more nuanced, especially those that genuinely seek to improve themselves through the understanding being INTJ in a world where we’re rare, rather than just inflating our egos immaturely with the TITLE of “the scientist.”