#in case anyone was wondering I am an INTP myself.

[jakedustry]

𝐖𝐇𝐎 𝐈𝐒 𝐈𝐙𝐙𝐘 ?

╰┈➤ first and foremost, I am a human being. I am not an object, a writing machine, or a fictional character. I have emotions and boundaries just like anyone else, and there are things I will not tolerate. So please, take a minute to read through my boundaries and what I have to say before you request/interact.

After being a human being, I am also a writer! I've been writing since 2020. At first in my native language, and since 2021 I've been writing in English. Even though it's already been 3 years since I started writing in English, my writing still keeps developing and so does my vocabulary. Please, be patient with me if you see me making mistakes. I always read what I write after myself but there might still be things I didn't notice so I am sorry in advance.

Who is Izzy when she isn't writing? ── .✦ ㅤㅤㅤI am a female (she/her) from central Europe, currently studying business! I am an introvert, but I don't mind getting to know new people. My MBTI is INTP, and I am an Aries born in April. I am pretty skilled learning wise! What I am the most confident in is Math, and languages after that!

What are some things you like? ── .✦ ㅤㅤㅤI am someone who loves loves cats! I also love music, reading, sleeping, anime, genshin, and much more! Some of my favorite tropes are fake dating and academic rivals, and I also enjoy reading fantasy a lot!

And what are some thing you don't like? ── .✦ ㅤㅤㅤspicy food and horrors! I am a scaredy cat. I also hate bugs, cigarettes' smoke, and people who hate on other people for their ethnicity/sexuality or anything else! Those are big no no's for me.

Writing wise, what are u comfortable with? ── .✦ ㅤㅤㅤAnything that isn't on my won't-write list loll. I am freak tbh, so things like threesomes, public sex, degrading, breeding, etc. are all fine! Obviously, I also write fluff and angst! Any tropes you can think of are a yes from me. I love trying out different au so don't be scared to ask for some fantasy, vampires, etc.!

In that case, what will you NOT be writing? ── .✦ ㅤㅤㅤRape, smuts where characters are underage, gender bend members, abuse (I might write implied abuse, but definitely not scenes where person gets abused), piss kink, BDSM. Those are all that come to my mind in the moment, but please have in mind I might still reject your request if I find something I am uncomfortable writing in it!

What is your stance on writing NI-KI smut? ── .✦ ㅤㅤㅤHalf and half tbh. I hate seeing older women sexualize him because whenever I see them I just remember the 14yo Riki who had to go through all that. But as someone his age, I KNOW he is not an innocent, nothing-knowing little boy. It is normal for people his age to have sex. So if you're wondering if I will be writing smut with him, my answer is maybe. I am not completely against the idea, but I am also not anyhow hyped for it.

Can you explain your tagging system? ── .✦ #✧˖°. enha industry ✧˖°. - enhypen stories #✧˖°. svt industry ✧˖°. - seventeen stories #✧˖°. izzy speaks ✧˖°. - for when I want to tell you guys about something/shit posts #✧˖°. jakedustry writes ✧˖°. - for all my stories, no matter the genre #✧˖°. izzy answers ✧˖°. - for when I am answering things from my inbox!

[giddleford]

Holmes Brothers MBTI Types

Before starting, I'd like to give some disclaimers. First of all, I am not an MBTI professional, I have not studied psychology and I do not have access to the standard test. However, I have tried to research as in depth as I possibly could and I hope you have this into consideration. Secondly, I might accidentally fuse fanon with canon. If this appears to be the case please point it out, I have read far too many different retellings of the same story and of the characters that sometimes it's hard to keep it straight. With that said I believe I can start with my analysis.

When I first learnt about MBTI my first instinct was to type myself and those around me, and I assume I'm not the only one who has experienced this. Having clear categories in my head, sorting people and predicting their actions appeared to be infinitely easier. At some point I started extending this classification to the fictional, particularly when I noticed that other people mistyped the characters according to my personal reasoning. That's how we've gotten here, it a way to record my thoughts and my interpretation of the characters from my point of view.

I'll cut right to the chase, Sherlock is an ISTP and Mycroft is an ISTJ. I must be honest that this has not been an easy task, and my naturally skeptical mind has doubted my choices plenty of times. If you are interested about my reasoning I suggest you keep reading if you are not then I suppose you can keep scrolling and never think of me and my interpretation ever again, however I do invite you to hear me out.

Let's start with the protagonist of the show. It is often that I see Sherlock as typed as an INTP, he is after all an eccentric genius and it does fit with the stereotypical view of people of that type. It makes sense to some degree, INTPs have Introverted Thinking as their primary function which aligns perfectly with Sherlock's behavior. The following quote sums up people with the function rather well:

"People who lead with introverted thinking are logical, systematic and objective to a fault. They enjoy finding ‘short-cuts’ that increase efficiency within a given system. Ti-dominants are often heavily introverted, as they take a great deal of time to understand how things work before they feel comfortable sharing or acting on their knowledge."

There are several things there that align with the character. The words "Logical, systematic and objective" prominently stand out. Sherlock being a Ti dominant reflects on his lack of interest on social interaction, which we all know is a key characteristic of his personality. Of course the last section, which indicates that Ti dominants take a long sharing out loud until their certain doesn't apply much to the character, Sherlock takes a very short time to share his deductions. However, he is fully certain of them when he shares them and his genius allows him to process things faster so it still fits somehow.

The most important detail that indicates that Sherlock is Ti dominant is actually is the fact that he has Fe as an inferior function. It is as a rule in the cognitive functions that if you have one as dominant the opposite is the inferior, which in this case is Extroverted Feeling. The following is a description of its role:

"Extroverted feeling is highly concerned with maintaining social norms and keeping the peace. It is a decision-making function that strives to do what is best for the group and picks up naturally on the emotions of others. It is a mirroring function that may cause the user to have trouble deciphering their own feelings without the input of others. Extroverted feeling requires social interaction to stay fulfilled, more so than any other function."

To have Fe as an inferior function is to neglect the function completely for a good bit of one's life until it finally develops. We all know how much Sherlock is criticized by ignoring social norms, in fact it's even worse than any Ti dominant would have, probably because of his unhealthy tendency to ignore and suppress emotions. I believe his character arch is actually him giving his first steps to learning how to develop it.

So it's settled, Sherlock is a Ti dominant, not necessarily because it's simple to see what he has but because of what he is clearly lacking, which is Fe. If you check the list of personality types, only two of them are Ti dominant and have inferior Fe, that we have established is way more important, it’s INTP and ISTP. The INTP personality type has Ti Ne Si Fe as it’s function sequence and the ISTP has Ti Se Ni Fe. If we look carefully at their differences, which are the auxiliary and tertiary functions, it becomes quite clear that Sherlock has an ISTP personality type.

“Extroverted sensing is focused on taking in the world as it exists in the present moment. It is highly in tune with the sights, smells, sounds and general physical stimulus that surrounds it. Extroverted sensing lives and thrives in the moment, more so than any other function.“

The previous quote is a description of the ISTP’s auxiliary function, Extroverted Sensing. I believe it’s quite obvious why this is Sherlock’s auxiliary function, however for the sake of it I’ll analyze Sherlock’s mental process and draw comparisons. When presented with a new situation, whether it’s a case, a client or a place, what Sherlock first does is observe. He looks at every single detail possible. Men’s deodorant? Ketchup stains? Nicotine stains? Sherlock collects the data, raw information staring him in his face. This is his Se on action. Then with all the information he’s collected he draws conclusions, what he calls deductions. Using logic he practically connects the dots, which is his dominant function acting. If he were an INTP, Ne would give him ideas and with logic he would eliminate the impossible, but that’s not what’s happening, he is not having ideas and then compares them to the evidence, he works the other way round.

His tertiary function, Ni, also has a huge influence in his behavior and personality. The following quote is from a person who has Introverted Intuition as a dominant function:

“People who lead with introverted intuition are usually intense, focused and highly perceptive of inconsistencies that arise in their external environment. They enjoy riddles, puzzles and wordplay. They often experience ‘hunches’ or ‘aha’ moments that they may identify as epiphanies.”

As I have explained, Sherlock doesn’t lead with Ni but he does however align perfectly with the description of someone who does. There is not one single word in that quote that could not describe Sherlock, probably because he has developed the function splendidly. The tertiary function acts as relief when his other two don’t work properly, which knowing Sherlock’s eventful life, he probably has had to use quite a lot, successfully developing it earlier than normal.

Right, let’s move on to the older brother, Mycroft. 

Mycroft is the root of all my doubts regarding this analysis and it is quite possible I could change my mind with a good argument. The amount of content we have of him is minimal, which is quite a shame because I have quite the soft spot for him. There also enters the idea of me mixing canon and fanon, Sherlock is a very well defined character in the show, Mycroft, however, is not. I have read a lot of fan made content that blurs the edges on what really happened on screen and what didn’t. So in this case I won’t have arguments as strong as I had with Sherlock.

My first instinct was to think that they shared personality type. They clearly use the same mechanism, they observe and they draw conclusions. In fact Mycroft is actually faster and better than Sherlock in this, not only because he’s older but because of the role he’s had to take when they were younger. There is, however, a key difference between the two, Mycroft is not crippled by his lacking Fe like Sherlock is meaning he probably doesn’t have Fe as his inferior function. This placed me at a quarry, this made the possibilities bigger and more ambiguous. I decided I must focus what he does have. Mycroft is clearly introverted and there’s no doubt about that, any extroverted type is then ruled out, particularly ESTP that has Se Ti Fe Ni as functions. While the ESTP is a strong competitor there are a couple of things that are off, like the inferior Ni or the following description of someone who leads wit Se:

“People who lead with extroverted sensing are often naturally athletic, highly impulsive and enjoy ever-changing stimuli. They place a high value on aesthetics and lust after the ‘finer things in life.’ Extroverted sensors usually aren’t interested in over-analyzing a situation – they simply see what they want and they go for it. These types tend to exude a natural sense of confidence, as they are usually quite sure of who they are and what they want.”

I won’t lie that the “finer things in life” part could apply, after all, Mycroft is rather posh. Alas, the rest of the description clearly does not align with the character, particularly the “highly impulsive part” successfully ruling out Mycroft as an ESTP.

Apart from being an introvert, what else do we know? Well there are two things that we know that reduce our search considerably, we know that he is a thinking type and that he is probably a sensing type. That leaves us with two options really, ISTP and ISTJ. As I argued earlier, Mycroft isn’t an ISTP so I had to research my only remaining option, the ISTJ. Initially I didn’t want to consider ISTJ as an option, I was quite convinced Mycroft had Se somewhere in his repertoire of functions, but then I realized it didn’t have to be like that. It is quite true that Mycroft and Sherlock have similar thought processes but perhaps they are just that, similar, not entirely the same but with the same results. The ISTJ personality type has Si Te Fi Ne as the function sequence, which has nothing to do with Sherlock’s ISTP type, but still oddly fit to Mycroft’s character.

So let’s review function by function and let’s see why it could fit. As I start, I’ll obviously begin with the dominant function, Introverted Sensing.

“Introverted sensing is a perceiving (information-gathering) function. It focuses on the subjective, internal world of personal experience and compares and contrasts new experiences to past experiences and memories. Si-users tend to notice patterns repeating themselves and are quick to spot changes or inconsistencies in their environment.”

Seeming as we don’t know Mycroft much I can’t assure you that this is definitely his dominant function but I can show you how it could reach the same results Sherlock’s Se does. As the quote explains, Si is a big filing system and it’s detail oriented which immediately hand’s Mycroft his superb observational skills. While Sherlock’s Se looks at what he has in front of him, Mycroft’s Si reviews his past for similar instances and successfully categorizes the situation, all information coming not from what he is currently observing but from what he has observed previously. In fact this function being experience based becomes better with age and it’s quicker to draw conclusions, since the conclusions can be found just with the use of the function and not with the aid of the auxiliary, like Sherlock has to do. The more I write about this the more I am convinced that this is Mycroft’s primary function.

The next function is Extroverted Thinking. The following is a description of the function:

“Extroverted thinking seeks to impose order on the external environment as efficiently and logically as possible. It values productivity above all else and is a results-based, action-oriented function. Extroverted thinking naturally implements concrete plans for accomplishing goals and is quick to make decisions.”

I can’t say for sure that this is indeed Mycroft’s auxiliary function but it’s either this or Fe, and we have already established that Mycroft isn’t a feeling type. Since his dominant function takes all his deduction process we have to observe how he makes decisions instead. Let’s review a highly stressful situation where his decision was quite important, the Rechienbach fall. Now, it’s not canonically explicit but it’s heavily implied that Mycroft was behind every possible option available in the rooftop. In fact if you analyze operation LAZARUS you can observe how utterly efficient everything is, Sherlock even describes it as the gears in a perfectly working clock. I can see how Te influenced in his decision making, Mycroft designed a perfectly working machine to achieve his goals. This function also explains why Sherlock highly believes that Mycroft has a power complex, his auxiliary function makes him want everything he has control over to be the most efficient as possible, making him naturally take full control. I do have arguments that defend Mycroft in this aspect, he doesn’t really seek for control and power, but that’s in another post of mine that you can find here.

Moving on to his function Introverted Feeling as the relief tertiary function, as you have probably noticed, I’ll follow my modus operandi and post in the following paragraph a description of the function.

“Introverted feeling is the in-depth analysis of emotional processes and morality. It seeks to break down emotions to their core and understand them as wholly as possible. It also develops a strong internal system of right and wrong, which the Fi user employs to make decisions. Introverted feeling searches for the deeper meaning behind absolutely everything. Introverted feelers are highly aware of and in touch with their own emotions, and when they put themselves in the shoes of others, they can often feel their pain or joy on a personal level.”

Let’s remember that Mycroft isn’t dominated by this function at all, after all it only makes an appearance when his Si and Te are helpless, very much like in The Final Problem when he was handed the gun by Sherlock to take the governor’s life. In that very moment Si was failing because hadn’t experienced anything like that before. Te was failing because without the aid of Si he couldn’t develop an efficient plan. So what happened? Fi took control. During that scene you see the Ice Man melt completely, Mycroft is horrified by everything that’s happening, he covers his eyes when he thinks John is going to shoot and gags when he sees the blood. His primary and auxiliary function are useless so when he is offered the gun he has to act by his moral code, which strongly demands him to reject the gun. As I said earlier, the more I write, the more I am convinced Mycroft is an ISTJ.

Let’s finalize Mycroft’s personality analysis with his inferior function, Extroverted Intuition.

“Extroverted intuition generates new possibilities, synthesizes abstract ideas and picks up on connections in the external environment. Extroverted intuition is capable of entertaining multiple contradictory ideas simultaneously as it sees almost every side to every situation. It is predominantly a future-oriented function that examines all the possibilities of what could happen next.”

Now, unlike Sherlock’s case, where it was quite obvious that he is missing Fe, Mycroft isn’t so obvious to show what he is lacking. Nonetheless, we still have material to analyze, namely his biggest mistake, letting Eurus and Moriarty meet. As you can see in the description, Ne is about seeing every possibility and thinking possible ramifications in the future. Mycroft by agreeing to let Moriarty and Eurus meet neglected the function completely, he was too focused on getting instant results that his Te demanded that he forgot to think what would happen in the long game. Being outwitted by his sister is the next step he is taking to develop his function, he’s realized he neglected it and so he will start trying harder to be aware of it. 

As I’ve said previously, not all versions of Mycroft fit the ISTJ type, some versions make him terrible at planning and get Anthea to do that, others make him like Sherlock and put Fe as his inferior function. Nonetheless, I believe I have hit the nail with their characterization, at least in show canon. Perhaps I’ll one day analyze Moriarty, John, Irene, and Greg, and see if the 16personalities web page is right about their types according to my reasoning. I could always come up with my theories on Mary, Eurus and Molly as well, but that are essays for another day.

[serodev]

Hello!!! I am new to tumblr and this is my 1st time requesting so I'm sorry if I got anything wrong! English is my 3rd language as well and I don't speak the language that much 😭

I'd like to request a match up! 😁 ( if those are even open I'm sorry in advanced if it's closed 😅)

My name is Mary tho my friends call me Mar-Mar since I have 5, yes 5 other friends named Mary as well 😭

I am pansexual and I am okay with any pronouns :DD! ( fun fact in my dialect we refer to everyone as they/them which I find very cool!!)

I am still unsure on what I identify as but at this point I let anyone perceive me as whatever they see me as!

I like the cold weather more than hot weathers! I also like to drink lots of coffee or as my friends like to say "ungodly amounts of coffee"

I doo have a really bad sleeping schedule most of the time I sleep at 2-3 and have to wake up at 7 😅

My hobbies are anything art related really! I most love anything that involves painting and charcoals! I like to collect shiny objects and pretty things in general. Outside of my hobbies I spend most of my time studying since I want to get out of my house as soon as possible. I also used to work a part time job tho I had to quit because of the pandemic and my family is overprotective since I'm the youngest and my three other brothers have already moved out a long time ago.

I'm a top student in my class and English is actually the subject I most suffer in 😭 those darned essays! My friends find it weird that I prefer math and science over English 🤣

My close friends and family would describe me as shy, quiet and reserved. Tho once I get close to them I manage to open up! My friends clame that I am "innocent" and that even in my age I am still oblivious to dirty words. Tho I'd blame my overly religious family for that. My friends also tell me that I am sometimes too kind 😅 I am an INTP and my horoscope is libra :D

I relate to a worrying amount of bungo stray dog characters 💀 ( Akutugawa, Ranpo, Kenji etc etc) my friends call it kinning I think???

I don't spend much time on social media. Really the only reason why I know some of the lingo is because of my friends explaining it to me aaand urban dictionary. The only ones I frequent are Facebook, discord ( if you could call that a social media? Idk it's where my friends chat so I downloaded it to chat with them!) and YouTube!

I am now only getting into anime and one of my firsts was Attack on Titan blame my brother for that. Bungo stray dogs being my second anime and it was recommended by a friend!

One thing I am proud of myself is how open minded I have become! Trust me, I was very ignorant and close minded back at 6th-7th grade. As in I was generally homophobic and every other bad thing. My friends helped me understand tho and later on I had just realised how toxic my family is 😧 even if they clame to be Christians. I'm very grateful for everything and especially my friends! They have helped me so much and are just the most understanding people that I know 😁

One thing I'd like to do is to get closer to my brothers! We've been chatting lately actually and if things go well then we might actually be able to hang out next year!

Thank you for reading! And have a wonderful day/night ☺️

Note(s): Don't worry! The matchups were still open when you sent in this message. You're also doing a really good job speaking/writing in English even though it's your third language! Anyway, I hope you enjoy your matchup! (Dw, I noticed your other message as well <3)

I match you up with…

Giyuu Tomioka!

» I know that it's sometimes hard to get along with other quiet people, especially when you're quiet/shy yourself, but from time to time, they can bring the best out of you, and I believe that's the case with you and Giyuu!

» Giyuu doesn't share too many hobbies with you (he's not good at drawing), but that doesn't mean that he won't partake in them! He likes to spend time with you, and it isn't usual for the two of you to do something together in this comforting quietness.

» He also understands your family situation 100%, even though his family wasn't exactly the same as yours. The things he does to make you feel better can be unnoticeable at first, but trust me when I say that he's going to take care of you and love you a ton!

[mbti-notes]

Anon wrote: Hi. I hope you had/are having a great summer break. I (INTP) am hoping for some perspective about an issue. Recently, my mother, whom I hadn’t seen in a while, became incredibly frustrated that I corrected her with an alleged “I know everything” attitude.

It’s an issue of concern because she revealed that I always do this. I guess this was the straw that broke it, especially given that what we were discussing was very trivial. (Maybe the frivolousness of the subject is precisely what made my correction seem more pedantic, unnecessary, arrogant.) She says that my attitude disregards her long life experience, and that if she were a stranger, she would think of me as a “snot-nosed brat who knows nothing about life” instead of as a “wise young person”, which is the viable alternative. She said that I am closed-minded and that I shoot everything down. (The problem of small-mindedness is what you addressed the only other time I wrote to you.)

I don’t know why I come off as arrogant. I’m sure that I’m not. I asked my mother what it was that made her think that, which she thought was a silly question because what she sensed was a general demeanor rather than specific behaviors. In the end we were only able to establish that my lack of eye contact was one of those factors. I can work on that, but surely that’s not determinant. What makes people think of others as arrogant? Should I stop correcting people? I don’t correct others in order to feel superior to them. I do it because I like to debate, in order to keep my thinking sharp, and because there is something painful about friends/family having false notions. I think it’s fair to say that my intention isn’t rooted in arrogant soils.

Granted, my suggestion of stopping correcting people is black-and-white, given that there is the grey option of changing the *way* I correct people. I’m just wondering if it’s an unhealthy habit in the first place. But given how prevalent a thought process it is (i.e. questioning people’s statements and finding faults), the process of getting rid of it may be akin to self-directed psychological violence. I mean, this is the same mode of being that makes me good at what I’m good at. (There’s also the option of keeping the thought process, but not correcting people aloud, but I don’t know what else there is to talk about other than analyzing ideas and their faults. Maybe I should analyze ideas for their strengths too, and express that side more than the faults.)

So anyway, let’s go with grey: So far I’ve tried thinking of an arrogant person that I know in order to understand my behavior, but I can’t think of anyone. Also, no matter how hard I try to put myself in someone else’s shoes in order to simulate an interaction with myself, it doesn’t really work, and I can’t see the arrogance, except if I were to just tell someone “that’s wrong” without any explanation. (I wonder if that’s what went wrong in the conversation with my mother.) Either way, this whole issue boils down to the fact that I’m not arrogant by any reasonable criteria that I found online, but that I come off as such. This was longer than intended. Thanks for your kindness and help.

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

Here are some questions for you to reflect on. They are meant to increase awareness of your underlying assumptions, beliefs, and values. Answer honestly:

Do you care about your mom? Do you care about how she's faring, what she's experiencing, what she's thinking or feeling, what she needs and desires, what she hopes for or aspires to, etc?

If you care, how do you SHOW your care to her?

If you don't care, how does that affect your behavior toward her?

Do you believe that the mother-child relationship only goes one-way? (Is it the mom's job to do for you but you owe her nothing?)

You say you like to debate to sharpen your mind. Innocent enough. I like to roller skate to keep myself physically fit. In an ideal world, I would never take my skates off. Does my enthusiasm for roller skating mean that I slap my skates on anywhere, any time? No. Surely it is inappropriate to skate around a hospital or the supermarket. Not only could I seriously harm myself, I would also be exhibiting flagrant disregard for the safety and well-being of others.

What you like to do for yourself sometimes comes into conflict with other people. If you care about people and hope to have healthy and happy relationships with them, you have to take their needs and wants into consideration in every interaction. You have to abide by ethical rules and principles that allow your needs to be met without neglecting the needs of others or interfering with their ability to get their needs met. Without ethics, society wouldn't be able to function, because it would just be a free-for-all.

You mention small-mindedness. It is quite small-minded to walk around the world only thinking about what you need/want. In the best case scenario, you are completely oblivious to others, and they will perceive you as clueless or self-absorbed. In the worst case scenario, you only interact with people for your own personal gain, and that would make you an exploitative or even abusive person. Is that the kind of person you want to be?

Do you basically treat people as though their sole purpose on earth is to debate you and help you sharpen your mind - to serve you? Do you launch into debates with people without asking for consent or checking to see if they want to be corrected? If you do, they will call you arrogant, not because you've put yourself on a pedestal and call yourself superior like an evil cartoon character, but because you are communicating to them that your needs/wants are most important AND you don't give a damn about theirs.

Webster's definition of arrogance: "an insulting way of thinking or behaving that comes from believing that you are better, smarter, or more important than other people". You believe that you know better, otherwise, you wouldn't grant yourself the social authority to intrude on people's boundaries, invalidate their experience, and correct them uninvited. You believe that you are smarter, otherwise, you wouldn't automatically assume the dominant social role of corrector. You behave as though you are the more important member of the relationship because your main priority is YOUR need to feel better (about your skills or about what others believe) while overlooking the other person's needs. Seems like you fit the definition quite well.

Despite that, I wouldn't call you arrogant because I understand that small-mindedness is a difficult problem to overcome. I see the effort that you're putting in to understand it. I'm charitable because I'm not the one who was hurt by your behavior. When people feel hurt, they often have difficulty expressing it. Maybe it comes out clumsily or they aren't able to explain their hurt without hurting you in return. Expressing one's true feelings is to make oneself vulnerable. If someone doesn't trust you to understand and validate their feelings or, worse, they believe that you will attack them for their feelings, they will not be completely honest with you. Your mom is trying her best to give you the benefit of the doubt by saying "if you were a stranger...", but she doesn't feel comfortable enough with you to express her hurt fully and explicitly as it happens. Why? Because the very reason she is hurt in the first place is that you have shown very little regard for her feelings. Following from the previous post of yours, the root of the problem is that you have such a poor understanding of feelings to begin with that you view them as inconsequential in yourself and others (very immature Fe).

I believe you have no ill-intent. I have said before that the typical Ti dom never sets out to hurt people on purpose. Rather, they hurt people unintentionally because their perspective is too small: 1) they don't grasp that other people's needs may be very different from their own and thereby fail to consider them, 2) they don't know how to empathize with different perspectives and validate them, and/or 3) they don't understand that SHOWING love and care is necessary for people to justify continued investment in the relationship.

In other words, Ti doms tend to hurt people out of negligence or acts of omission. Some of them get frustrated at not being able to solve their relationship problems. They might try to convince themselves that doing nothing means that no harm can be done, so they adopt a passive stance in the relationship and perhaps even train themselves to keep their mouth shut (self-violence). They fail to understand that there's more than one way to cause hurt. Instead of learning better relationship skills, they check out mentally and emotionally. Being checked out only makes it worse because you hurt yourself and you keep hurting others by being even less attentive to their needs.

The foundation of meaningful relationships is showing care. In a healthy relationship, people trust you to care for their emotional needs and not violate their personal boundaries. If you only attend to your own needs/wants in social interaction, you are signalling that you don't really care about the other person. This problem with your mom shows that you give little to no consideration for emotional needs and personal boundaries. If you don't want friends, it's entirely your choice to be alone for the rest of your life, pretending that you never leave any footprints behind you. If you want friends, you'll have to put out more effort to be a better friend, by paying more attention to the consequences of your behavior.

Doing things that violate trust and boundaries, even if unintentional, causes hurt. When people feel hurt and don't feel safe to express the hurt, they are liable to say/do negative things. To have good emotional intelligence is to see past the surface of their negative words/behavior and grasp the underlying emotional needs that were unmet and/or the personal boundaries that were violated. Only then can you be a morally responsible member of a relationship, in terms of owning all the ways that you impact people, both positively and negatively.

Arrogant people don't care about the social impact they produce. As long as they get what they want and don't lose anything, the existence of others is of little importance to them. If your mom is important to you, then learn how to show it better by listening to her when she tells you about her needs/wants. You hyperfocus on the literal meaning of the word "arrogant" and whether it is true/false of you, as though proving it false means that there's nothing wrong. You need to listen to the people you have hurt, if you want to understand why your behavior is hurtful. Alternatively, you need to educate yourself about emotional needs, interpersonal boundaries, and what constitutes un/ethical behavior and why.

[pilawforhire-archived]

[[[ edit: Thank you, everyone, who has been so kind and wonderful as to answer the questions with your thoughts. These are posts that have been shared in response, and I’m linking these in case anyone wants to read them. By someidioticurl, ask-heartstealer-law, trafalgar-bleedingheart-law. Thank you.

Hi guys, so I’m requesting a little help here. I’ve been trying to get a better understanding of Law’s character, and unfortunately, the more I think about things, the more I feel confused and uncertain.

Thus, I would like to reach out to other Law muses, with some questions and headcanons that you might have considered in your portrayal. (Ps you don’t have to indulge me, of course. But if you want to, please go ahead, thank you.)

Of course, this extends to just about anyone who wants to humour me and wouldn’t mind telling me what you think! And speaking of humour, this is all about it!

Without further ado, my biggest question, or the question I started out with earlier, was:

What is Law’s sense of humour? What are your HCs regarding that?

(some more related questions below the read more)

Tagging: @ask-heartstealer-law @trafalgar-bleedingheart-law @eviscxration @nobedsidemanners @locum-magneticum (sorry guys, ps just overlook this if you’d like, it’s time-consuming and I kinda doubt anyone would want to read it tbh..)

***NOTE: THIS IS LONG, and mostly for my own future self-reference, but I’m not sure if anyone might find reading about it useful. ***NOTE: You don’t have to read all this! You can just comment/reblog/etc with what you think in general on the topic of humour. I appreciate any and all thoughts on the matter. This is just for anyone who wants to read up more on the types of humour, if it may help in understanding your character.

***QUESTIONS >> You don’t have to read the bottom notes. Here are some questions I had, instead, if you may feel like you want to answer them. Again, mostly for my future reference, but maybe it might help someone...*

What are situations that amuse him?

How does he show it? (Smile vs laugh till he cries-- if he would ever do that vs hide his amusement)

Is he able to laugh at himself/life (when things go wrong or when he self-reflects)?

Does he seek or avoid confrontation? (He doesn’t seem like someone who would go picking fights, yet his cocky behaviour pre TS seems to me like he enjoys rubbing people the wrong way)

What is his self-esteem/self-confidence/self-worth levels? Does he hate himself, and how long does he dwell on it before moving on?

Does he understand most jokes?

Does he use humour to cope?

Does he keep silent if something rubs him the wrong way? (His shock at his own outward declaration of hating bread seems to infer that he usually doesn’t vocalise his concerns or when he doesn’t like things. And yet, in Dressrosa, he was complaining a lot, but that’s because he was under a lot of stress, exhaustion, and the circumstances meant he probably couldn’t care to hold things in anymore.)

Does he worry about what people think of him? (He seems to value his reputation, and likes that people think of him as cruel/sadistic though I believe those are limited to rumours)

He's always cool-headed and calm, but is he overly sensitive? (It seems like he is? Although he doesn’t show it.)

What does he think of himself? Does he hate himself? (He would seem to harbour guilt of his failure to protect Corazon and his family; to have failed as an older brother, have low self-worth.)

Does he find amusement in others’ misfortune? (I don’t see it. Like he’s humble, and I don’t think he laughs at others’ disabilities or misery, and yet he isn’t beyond messing up his enemies in a cruel way. SO! What are his limits? Where does he draw the line in his ‘cruelty’?)

Does he meditate?

What does he do when stressed?

What does he do when things get hopeless?

My brief thoughts:

Initially, I thought he wouldn’t be someone who could laugh at his own misery/life, but I think it would sound like something he could use to cope with past trauma. He’s not the self-defeating kind, at least, not outwardly?

The only display of humour from him (that my idiot memory remembers) is at Zou when he comments that a display of clone jutsu would be cool, and maybe in SA when he was amused by Luffy’s outrageous nature towards the CD. Also perhaps he is somewhat amused when he messes with enemies using his Ope Ope, switching personalities, body parts, taking their hearts..

Anyway, as I’ve read up (briefly), there are 4 main classifications of humour, and I think everyone has a percentage of each type to a certain degree.

Humour styles according to wiki, summed up roughly, credit to here

Affiliative, self-enhancing, aggressive, self-defeating

Affiliative:

used to enhance one’s r/s with others in a positive manner; used in self-accepting way

used to charm and amuse others, ease tension

spontaneous jokes, witty banter, enjoys laughing with others

individuals with high levels of this more likely to initiate friendships/increase group cohesiveness and promote creativity in group settings

associated with increased levels of self-esteem, well-being, emotional stability, social intimacy

individuals who use this tend to have higher levels of extraversion and openness to experience

telling jokes about things everyone might find funny

to bring people together, fellowship, happiness

Examples:

I don’t often joke with my friends

Jerry Seinfeld

Self-enhancing:

good natured attitude towards life; the ability to laugh at yourself, circumstances, idiosyncrasies of life in constructive, non-detrimental manner

used to enhance self in a positive manner; coping or emotion regulating humour

to look on the bright side of a bad situation, find silver lining

decreases levels of depression and anxiety

individuals more likely to exhibit extraversion and openness to experience

Examples:

If I’m feeling upset or unhappy I try to think of something funny about the situation to make myself feel better.

Even when by myself, I’m often amused by the absurdities of life.

Aggressive:

detrimental towards others

use of sarcasm, put-downs, teasing, criticism, ridicule at expense of others

individuals don’t care about the impact on others

examples are prejudices like racism and sexism

seems playful fun but the underlying intent may be to harm or belittle

related to high levels of neuroticism, lower levels of agreeableness and conscientiousness

individuals more highly aggressive and hostile; used by bullies

Examples:

When telling jokes or saying funny things, I am not usually concerned about how people take it.

If you think people are laughing at you, they probably are.

Self-defeating:

potentially detrimental humour towards the self; gain approval from others

laughter at own expense; “poor me”

pleasing others by being butt of joke

sometimes seen as form of denial; humour used as defense mechanism for hiding negative feelings of self

individuals frequently using this style show increased depressive symptoms

higher levels of neuroticism, lower levels of agreeableness and conscientiousness

associated with low self esteem, well being, intimacy

Examples:

I often try to make people like or accept me more by saying something about my weaknesses or blunders or faults.

I cover up problems and unhappiness by joking around, so closest friends don’t know how I feel

Further reading:

What do different personality types think about how people understand or misunderstand their sense of humour?

Analysts (INTP/INTJ) most likely to feel their humour is misunderstood. They are good at problem solving and generating ideas but may not translate well into humour. Visionary, highly intelligent personality types may engage in humour they understand but fail to make it relatable. Extraverted analysts, however, less likely to feel their sense of humour is misunderstood, as they have higher confidence in their abilities and are more outgoing.

Diplomats (INFP-T/INFJ-T) likely to feel others misunderstood their sense of humour. Though their personalities centre on relations with others, specifically tolerance and harmony, they are also most likely to take things personally and suffer insecurity. Desire to create harmony + overly sensitive nature = recipe for feeling misunderstood

Sentinels: Prefer traits like loyalty and trustworthiness to spontaneity or playfulness. Observant and Judging, values clarity, facts, observable things, as opposed to imaginative and unexpected. Sense of humour consists of tried and true, straightforward approach vs unpredictable humour.

Note to self: Read up more on personality types, since I know nothing of the matter other than the brief general basics.

20 types and forms of humour:

Which forms do you think Law enjoys?

I would think, dark/morbid, deadpan/dry, mordant? But those are the forms I think he would show. The kinds of humour he would enjoy, I’m still thinking about.

Other links to types of humour

Well. Thanks if you got that far. ]]]]]

[kitschcats]

The Cynic v. Astrology v. Faith v. More Astrology v. All Other Forms of Alleged Bullshit

I’m going to be reposting some older pieces that never made it here. (1/9/2019)

Astrology? Bullshit.

--or so I've been predisposedly conditioned to believe, at least. It might just be my skeptical side, being an all-hatingly pessimistic INTP (at least according to the last 20 times I retook the same MBTI test over and over just to make sure?) in all my sunshine-and-rainbows-and-happiness-allergic, rationale-above-all glory and everything, but astrology Twitter could never quite sell me the idea of the positions of the constellations and the retrograde motions of the planets having any kind of influence on the state of human affairs. The cynic in me could dismiss the idea as too wishy-washy for my tastes, but I think part of me must have thought it was bigger than just that, much bigger--the stars themselves, as well as the very idea that they could directly interfere with our lives. The stars just seemed too far away for that. Wrapped up in bigger, more important dealings of celestial bodies, too distant and too pretty to bother helming such pivotal positions to humanity, and for centuries since, at that.

Perhaps the thought of having someone, or something, so transcendent have a say in our lives in ways we don't, perhaps carving for us predestined paths we can do all but nothing about; the very idea of something bigger than me having control, absolute and unquestioning, over me--over us as a collective species--scares me. A little like faith. (It's curiously ironic--I always thought I'd never be able to rest easy if I didn't die working for or working towards something bigger than I was. A cause, a movement, a fight, a revolution, I just know I'd toss and turn in my grave if it were anything but--and that I'd rather die before I willingly let myself get caught in the rat race and submit to the corporate world so highly favoured by our capitalist society--yet here I am, cowering in fear of the governance of something bigger than me, over me.)

God--if she/he/they/such an entity exist(s)--and I have had a complicated relationship ever since I was told by my ustazah to keep the questions I had about dinosaurs in the Qur'an to myself. There was a lot of questioning of my faith and even more committings of blasphemy, and to tell the honest-to-God-capital-G (ha!) truth this seems like the perfect spot in a sentence to interject a "but," but there is no real but. Sike. We use "but"'s as conjunctions for when what we're about to say contrasts with what was just said prior, but in this case there are no contrasts, no opposites, no contraries, no nilai-nilai murni, no pesan moral cerita, and there is no happy ending to forgive my unpious doubts.

A good chunk of my time I find myself questioning what I believe in and what I don't and why. Suppose I be a good Malay-Muslim girl, get lots of pahala, and masuk syurga, where it's sunshine and rainbows and happiness forever--and then what? Is the promise of forever all there is to it, to drive believers to do good deeds and not commit sins and continue to fear God? Hollywood clichés may be a stale comparison to this, but we've seen it in movies, it's a painfully repetitive trope: poverty, suffering, Miracle Magic, fame, wealth, drunken indulgence, wear-tear, boredom, dissatisfaction, greed, The Big Mistake, followed by The Bigger Crash, regret, The Retribution-and-Subsequent-Begging-for-Forgiveness Arc, then Sudden Wisdom-Beyond-One's-Years, and finally, a lackluster ending--and this is one's reward for painstaking worship in the mortal world, but for all eternity? How many lifetimes worth of promises of forever can you endure before you're driven mad by all the happiness in the world? If the only thing slower and more painful than being condemned to an eternity of dosa-induced punishment in Hell is being rewarded a pahala-blessed eternity of happiness in Heaven down a gradual descent into insanity, does that make being sent to Heaven a form of punishment of its own?

And suppose I traverse the path less trodden here in totalitarian-Islamist-Malaysia, are we to assume that we've all got one shot, and that lives we're living now are the only ones we'll get before dissipating into universal matter at best, nothing at worst, priests and rapists, CEOs and pedophiles, pastors and serial killers, believers and non-believers, men, women, children, all things in between, good, bad, black, white, grey, all alike?

(After pressing enter here, I stared blankly at this document, half-written and half-formulated and not a word proofread (as if I were planning on it!) for the longest time, my fingers hovering over the keyboard and doing that funny little ritual dance of hesitation, unsure if it would be right to break the paragraph here, seeing as my word count has been very (clearly) unevenly distributed thus far. I decided there was no right or wrong, and carried on writing, no line breaks backspaced in the process.)

What an optimistic thing to think about.

My natal birth chart tells me I'm a Pisces sun, Virgo moon, and Libra rising. At first completely foreign terminology to me, a little bit of digging had me finding out that my sun and moon signs were at complete odds with each other; polar opposites; and that I, in other words, am very much susceptible to constant internal struggle. "Blessed" with the wishy-washy, flip-floppy nature and escapist tendencies of the Pisces sun and the critically anal-retentive groundedness of the Virgo moon, the strange combination most definitely makes for a walking contradiction, i.e. me. (Fun fact: Kurt Cobain, too.)

(And, completely contrary to my fear of the divine and unknown as mentioned earlier, Pisces suns tune in to higher purposes and have dreams that transcend individuals, avoiding the harsh realities of otherwise by indulging in escapist self-delusions. I wonder if this sounds familiar?)

I still don't quite know what to make of the concept. I've heard stories of individuals feeling more in sync with the universe after getting in touch with their starry sides, but the idea of it all but makes me fear the universe all the more------but there must be a reason as to why astrology, for millennia upon millennia, in every culture, every great era, every ancient civilisation worth its salt, spanning continental boundaries, has been so closely intertwined with human lives; why the history of the celestial calendar dates so far back yonder; why it had always borne such significance to generations of nobles, to highly-revered priests, to merchants at sea, to humble farmers, to lost travelers, and to ordinary peasants alike; why the stars have always been our milemarkers and the constellations our compass and the sky our map to the entirety of our tiny, observable worlds; and who was it who first looked up and sensed the presence of something greater than them, whispering answers from the sky above? What did our ancestors, spread out across each far corner of the earth in a time of isolation and the unknown, know that we didn't?

Perhaps it's just too infinitely all-knowing a concept for me to be able to properly wrap my head around. In short: the universe is a great, big, incomprehensibly mysterious thing, and it fucking terrifies me. As I write this, sitting in the quiet of a 3AM night and in the darkness of my room, illuminated only by my night mode-tinted laptop screen and by the lights of neighbouring windows outside, I wonder: do I enjoy the possibility of being at its (the universe's) merciless whims after death, as with everyone and everything else I had ever come to know of in existence during this lifetime, as opposed to a fairytale God and Devil and Heaven and Hell? Possibly.

All irony aside, I do feel optimistic about one thing. An enthusiastic "update that damn blog" has been on my to-do-list for the longest time, and finally no longer in vain. I've been simultaneously feeling a lot of things as well as none at all--both at once, curious as it is--which is what I blame for my frustratingly stubborn inability to put thoughts to words to document this past year, as well as my horribly demotivated self. Dramatic as it seems, the year-long dry spell (I mean, a year? Togashi Yoshihiro, anyone?) had me thinking I'd never be able to write again. But here I am now, writing about it. Writing and translating my thoughts into real, letter-by-letter words. I feel strangely light. Perhaps all I needed was a little faith.