Wearing the pants

[PortInStorm]

Something Santana said makes me wonder:

If you're in a relationship, do you 'wear the pants'? If so, what's your mate's personality type? Are there certain areas you control, and others that the mate does? Or are you more the 'neck that guides the head'?

[quentin]

I honestly don't care.

[Solaris]

I have had a tendency to wear the pants. However, I grow tired of such relationships and leave them. Also, I don't not respond well to men who try to "depants" me -- by which I mean those who resort to manipulation and emotional crap to weaken the power of me wearing the pants. I leave that quickly as well.

So, while I tend to wear the pants, I don't actually want to. I'd like to just share the pants. Is that so much to ask?

[Santana28]

well, i'll clarify.

in the beginning of a relationship/friendship - we are either equals, or i am the subordinate. since all of my relationships have developed from very strong and intimate friendships which many mutual interests and desires, things have always been extremely rewarding initially.

the problem is - i have evolved and changed, and they have either remained the same and/or revealed a completely different persona than the one initially presented.

i have a strong, dynamic personality and i seek out the same - and what i usually find are narcissists. as we all know - INTJs dig and dig and dig and i'm no exception - i try to get to the bottom of everything, including the personality issues of whoever i'm in proximity to. More often than not, it's not pretty.

That being said - if my partner suddenly reveals himself to be less than worthy of my admiration and respect, i will step up and put on those "pants" - at which time it is very difficult for me to relinquish them back. I actually prefer not to be in charge, but i can't stand incompetence and i'd rather just do it myself than have to worry about something.

So - what we currently have is a traditional family. One partner cooks, cleans, takes the child to appointments, grocery shops, and is the primary care-giver. The other spouse is the primary bread-winner who works inconvenient hours, takes care of the car, fixes things that are broken around the house, and pays the bills.

Guess which is which?





Santana28 added to this post, 2 minutes and 57 seconds later...

I have had a tendency to wear the pants. However, I grow tired of such relationships and leave them. Also, I don't not respond well to men who try to "depants" me -- by which I mean those who resort to manipulation and emotional crap to weaken the power of me wearing the pants. I leave that quickly as well.

So, while I tend to wear the pants, I don't actually want to. I'd like to just share the pants. Is that so much to ask?

i agree with everything you said. and what is with it with these emotional people who think you can "depant" an NTJ by emotional manipulation?

FP types who mistake themselves for TJ types are the ABSOLUTE worst.

[PortInStorm]

Hmmm, I'd say you were the bread-winner, since you once said your partner was a very good cook, yes?

I will do exactly the opposite if someone tries to 'depant' me with guilt. I don't care what I originally wanted to do, I'll just have this fierce urge to show them I do what I decide.

Can we say pants one more time? Pants- there. Or in tribute to the interracial thread- les pontouffles (is that French?;)), trousers, britches...

[Santana28]

Hmmm, I'd say you were the bread-winner, since you once said your partner was a very good cook, yes?

I will do exactly the opposite if someone tries to 'depant' me with guilt. I don't care what I originally wanted to do, I'll just have this fierce urge to show them I do what I decide.

Can we say pants one more time? Pants- there. Or in tribute to the interracial thread- les pontouffles (is that French?;)), trousers, britches...

los pantalones?

[PortInStorm]

los pantalones?

I'm an idiot- I don't want to share the slippers:embarassed:, I want to share les pantalons....

[Solaris]

i agree with everything you said. and what is with it with these emotional people who think you can "depant" an NTJ by emotional manipulation?

FP types who mistake themselves for TJ types are the ABSOLUTE worst.

I detest being emotionally manipulated. I know that, when younger, I was at a higher risk for it, because I so sorely misunderstood my own feelings. I think that's what makes some of these types think they can do this to NTJs -- we seem so inept with our emotions, they think we surely will be easy to play. Sometimes this is true, sometimes not. I think it can be easy to start with us, but as soon as we notice, it comes to an abrupt halt. And when I say notice, I mean fully understanding its motives, looks, effects, etc.

Sorry to make a Harry Potter reference, but it's like when those in the wizarding world can only see an animal called a thestral after seeing death. Everyone got mad because they thought Harry should have been able to see thestrals sooner, but then it was explained that simply seeing death was not enough. One had to fully absorb the meaning of death, and the death, in order to see the thestrals.

Anyway, back on topic. Having stupidly been involved for way too long with an ISFP, I have learned that the first four preferences of ENTJ and ISFP are the same, just reversed. Once I thought about that, it made sense. My ex tried to tap into his 3rd and 4th preferences for me, I think, and was sometimes successful, but mostly not. Those things are what made him seem attractive at first. So maybe we see these types and are fooled, at first, by their use of N and T? Maybe we pick those out and hold onto them?
But as soon as we expect them to function like a TJ, or an NT, they fail miserably. Hence, the trading of the pants -- we idealize it, and think it will be the sort of temporary trade we expect in a relationship; and, they think "oh thank goodness I don't have to wear those anymore" -- until, of course, they decide they did like the pants afterall. [edit] Of course, by that time, we've tailored the pants to suit ourselves and won't give them back.

Clearly, I have a lot of thoughts on this subject. lol I didn't mean to ramble on so long. :embarassed::undecided:

[Santana28]

Anyway, back on topic. Having stupidly been involved for way too long with an ISFP, I have learned that the first four preferences of ENTJ and ISFP are the same, just reversed. Once I thought about that, it made sense. My ex tried to tap into his 3rd and 4th preferences for me, I think, and was sometimes successful, but mostly not. Those things are what made him seem attractive at first. So maybe we see these types and are fooled, at first, by their use of N and T? Maybe we pick those out and hold onto them?
But as soon as we expect them to function like a TJ, or an NT, they fail miserably. Hence, the trading of the pants -- we think idealize and think it will be the sort of temporary trade we expect in a relationship; and, they think "oh thank goodness I don't have to wear those anymore" -- until, of course, they decide they did like the pants afterall.

Clearly, I have a lot of thoughts on this subject. lol I didn't mean to ramble on so long. :embarassed::undecided:

okay, first off - i have never read nor watched nor thought about anything harry potter in my entire life, so i completely missed the reference.

second - everything you said is correct. thats why i have found an inordinate amount of narcissists in my travels... i find people that are trying to "be" something that they are not, and that is typically what they are insecure about. someone lacking TJ skills is going to do their best to learn/mimic TJ skills... and would naturally be attracted to someone with strong TJ skills. So what i get is an FP who has self-taught TJ traits and interests but who eventually in close proximity reveals massive insecurity and resentment and eventually drops the game all together.

[rwyatt365]

Let's see…my wife and I battle incessantly over who "wears the pants". I'm hopelessly old-fashioned, and I thought the she was too – you know, the whole breadwinner/housewife thing. That's what we talked about before getting married, and that's what I signed up for. Little did I know that it was all a "clever disguise" – and that she wanted all of "the power" for her very own. Of course, I fought against that and we've been at each other's throat since then.

Let me clarify a little when I say that I'm "old fashioned", I mean that I believe that – in a marriage – the man is the head of the household. Husband and wife communicate and share input to the decision-making process, but the husband makes the "final call". That does not mean that he ignores his wife's inputs, and it does not mean that his way is the only way. What it does mean is that, if there is a disagreement or difference in approach, the husband will have the final say-so. Yes, it's sexist – yes, it's macho (and on, and on). But it is not my desire to impose this on anyone that does not adhere to this type of relationship. I expect that whomever I was with would understand what it means, and is ok with it. So I made my views known from day-one.

This old-fashioned viewpoint only relates to decision-making within the relationship. I don't care who cooks, or cleans, or cuts the grass. I regularly cook (last night was swordfish steak with roasted peppers and scallops…Mmmmm), and cut the grass. She washes clothes and cleans the toilet. We decide who does what. We clash on who does the bills (me), and who takes out the garbage (her, sometimes), among other things. According to her I'm a control-freak (and…so what! I "paid the cost to be the boss"). My answer is "get over it".

[Solaris]

okay, first off - i have never read nor watched nor thought about anything harry potter in my entire life, so i completely missed the reference.

second - everything you said is correct. thats why i have found an inordinate amount of narcissists in my travels... i find people that are trying to "be" something that they are not, and that is typically what they are insecure about. someone lacking TJ skills is going to do their best to learn/mimic TJ skills... and would naturally be attracted to someone with strong TJ skills. So what i get is an FP who has self-taught TJ traits and interests but who eventually in close proximity reveals massive insecurity and resentment and eventually drops the game all together.

Sorry, I tried to make it as broad as possible for others who haven't read HP.

Do you find that you sometimes discover "the pants" on you because you have lapsed into a role in which you are trying to help them grow as you would try to grow yourself? In other words, if somebody shows a desire to expand, I want to help them reach that. I always want to be growing and learning, so I foster that in others. Perhaps it's my Fi trait coming out. I just think life is a waste if you aren't growing and learning. So, if I am strong in something, and my SO is not, I'll take the pants while he struggles through the learning curve. Unfortunately, the men I have known tend not to ever come back for the pants in a healthy way.

Argh.

[rwyatt365]

Unfortunately, the men I have known tend not to ever come back for the pants in a healthy way.

Argh.
Solaris, I will never, ever say "Honey, I can't find my pants. Do you know where they are?", again in my whole life. ;D

[Santana28]

Sorry, I tried to make it as broad as possible for others who haven't read HP.

Do you find that you sometimes discover "the pants" on you because you have lapsed into a role in which you are trying to help them grow as you would try to grow yourself? In other words, if somebody shows a desire to expand, I want to help them reach that. I always want to be growing and learning, so I foster that in others. Perhaps it's my Fi trait coming out. I just think life is a waste if you aren't growing and learning. So, if I am strong in something, and my SO is not, I'll take the pants while he struggles through the learning curve. Unfortunately, the men I have known tend not to ever come back for the pants in a healthy way.

Argh.

yeah, i do find that. unfortunately.. i'm damned if i do, or damned if i dont. if i take up the reigns on something, he accuses me of not letting him take charge. if i wait and wait and beg him to decide on something, he chooses to do nothing. so i step up and do something - and he accuses me of disregarding his opinion. if i do something out of initiative to be a good example for him - he says i'm selfish and self-centered and not concerned about his feelings.

its just insecurity and need for control. i ignore it now :)

[Solaris]

yeah, i do find that. unfortunately.. i'm damned if i do, or damned if i dont. if i take up the reigns on something, he accuses me of not letting him take charge. if i wait and wait and beg him to decide on something, he chooses to do nothing. so i step up and do something - and he accuses me of disregarding his opinion. if i do something out of initiative to be a good example for him - he says i'm selfish and self-centered and not concerned about his feelings.

its just insecurity and need for control. i ignore it now :)

It sounds nightmarishly familiar. Except the part where you write "he says" as my ex was not one to voice anything. As you can imagine, that didn't go over so well for me after a while. Speaking via actions is fine, but one must actually take them. I know many people that speak through their actions rather than their words; however, they have to be actions I understand I guess, or I see them as pointless. Then I see the person as non-communicative.

I'm going running now. Anemia be damned, I need a run!

[James Revell]

Let's see…my wife and I battle incessantly over who "wears the pants". I'm hopelessly old-fashioned, and I thought the she was too – you know, the whole breadwinner/housewife thing. That's what we talked about before getting married, and that's what I signed up for. Little did I know that it was all a "clever disguise" – and that she wanted all of "the power" for her very own. Of course, I fought against that and we've been at each other's throat since then.

According to her I'm a control-freak (and…so what! I "paid the cost to be the boss"). My answer is "get over it".

I'd say I feel your pain brother, but in reality it's a high level of understanding and little feeling. It's difficult to delegate the pants went someone doesn't share well

I didn't have quite the old-fashioned intentions, but the reality is about the same. It's nearly a constant struggle to keep here from assuming all power she desires, which at least isn't everything. Funny thing is she doesn't necessarily want all the responsibility that goes along with it and either won't participate in or abide by renegotiation of authority. This doesn't seem to fit her ESFJ type much, but I'm exactly great at giving lots of positive affirmation even in the best situations.

In my situation we both admit to being stubborn with tendancies to be control-freaks in certain areas. A number of people advise me to just let her have her way for the sake of the marriage as far things in the home, but that's never going to happen. I'm perfectly fine with compromise, but she isn't since she views it as no one getting what they want instead of everyone getting some of what they want.

[Solaris]

Solaris, I will never, ever say "Honey, I can't find my pants. Do you know where they are?", again in my whole life. ;D

I'll shove the pants down your throat, or suggest to your wife that she do so. j/k:p

[Zilal]

No, it's funny, I tend to want to take control in many social settings, but my relationships have been very egalitarian. I don't really want control there. I need a break!

[karen]

My husband has always insisted on 'wearing the pants' the only problem is, he is incapable of leading. I just kinda make everything work and hopes he doesn't notice. He has the occasional hissy fit about me not letting him run things, I promise to let him do it, he promises to do a god job, he breaks his promise, forcing me to break mine, and we are back to normal. I would love it though, if he were able to be in control of things, I don't really like it.

[spiritdetectivegirl]

I don't care, but it would nag at me if the guy would try to rule over me, like he's my keeper.

[fripping]

my impression is that intjs always wear the pants if they are with a P, not sure what they do with other Js. possibly share. my intj g/f definitely wears the pants. it's all right for now, but i sometimes wonder if my self-respect will hold up indefinitely, or if she'll take off the pants and put them in the closet once i become a reliable breadwinner (both students, but i just graduated and she is careful to remind me every day to GET A JOB GET A JOB HURRY UP GET A JOB WHY DON'T YOU HAVE ONE YET).

i don't take very good care of myself from a J perspective, so i doubt she would.

[PortInStorm]

One of the things I love about my spouse is that he doesn't try to control- and the 2 or 3 times he's tried it's been an absolute disaster. When he tries to force me, it's unbelievable anger or even rage. I really try to give him the final say on most decisions, and to factor in his preferences in my decision (and ask if I'm not sure of them). However, when I feel so strongly about something that I supercede those, and he still tries to impose his way, it gets messy.

Now that I write this out, perhaps I wonder if I do let him wear the pants. Although I really do think I take his preferences into account. I figure if I feel that strongly about something, he should notice it and amend his desires. It's not like I take a really strong, unbending stand that often. I think....

[elsdfr]

I thought "wearing the pants" went out after Womens Lib. and the 70's... old fashioned indeed!

I have heard of a relationship where the female was supposedly wearing the pants. I never met the guy but I don't blame him, she was a "Queen" in every sense of the word. I don't envy a female finding herself in that situation though. I think the ideal definately to find balance, otherwise its not healthy.

[Bossy Mom]

I was definitely in charge in my first marriage. My husband had a very high IQ with two degrees from MIT and an MBA from Northwestern, but I was the Boss. I even finished his sentences for him. Once a marriage counselor asked me why I finished his sentences and I replied truthfully, "I get tired of waiting and I know what he's going to say anyway."

I was also in charge in my second marriage, but it was more difficult because he had a very strong personality too.

[Uytuun]

I hate the pants! And I hate when guys put them on me. I hate to be put in a role in which they engage my weak J for leading which then results in the growth of the J. I like my J weak thankyouverymuch. I don't want to be controlling and I don't want to be controlled.

both students, but i just graduated and she is careful to remind me every day to GET A JOB GET A JOB HURRY UP GET A JOB WHY DON'T YOU HAVE ONE YET

Aaaargh, worst case scenario. I really don't want to turn into one of those nagging Js (no offence meant at all). I'm quite sure that Ps are able to look after themselves in their own way...right? :p

[fripping]

I hate the pants! And I hate when guys put them on me. I hate to be put in a role in which they engage my weak J for leading which then results in the growth of the J. I like my J weak thankyouverymuch. I don't want to be controlling and I don't want to be controlled.



Aaaargh, worst case scenario. I really don't want to turn into one of those nagging Js (no offence meant at all). I'm quite sure that Ps are able to look after themselves in their own way...right? :p
but can i convince her of that? i feel it will be the struggle that will make or break our relationship. i've brought it up with her before but her constant micromanaging and nagging on extremely nonessential issues (wash the strawberries twice, baby! comb your hair, baby! no, THIS is how you clean a dish, baby!) seems to be a habit that dies hard and will require me to bring it up again many, many times. i confess, i sometimes take my aggression out on this forum by being extremely sarcastic.

I was definitely in charge in my first marriage. My husband had a very high IQ with two degrees from MIT and an MBA from Northwestern, but I was the Boss. I even finished his sentences for him. Once a marriage counselor asked me why I finished his sentences and I replied truthfully, "I get tired of waiting and I know what he's going to say anyway."

I was also in charge in my second marriage, but it was more difficult because he had a very strong personality too.
assuming you're not joking, only one question enters my mind: W-H-Y? you must have known it couldn't possibly be good for your marriage.

[Uytuun]

That's alright. I would hug you, but it might get me banned. :p

Well...firstly, I think the whole nagging thing stems from her wanting the best for you. But in doing so, she determines what's best for you from her INTJ perspective. Have you tried explaining to her that you're a different type and that you have different needs/wishes/desires? I guess that INTJs have a tendency to strive for perfection. But I think it's great when you can embrace your SO's nature differences included.

I will in fact admit that I was going down the nagging road in my previous relationship as well. And I was totally disgusted with myself. Plus, it was really taxing since I'm not a strong J anyway. I felt like I had to take on all the responsibility. It was not what I wanted to become. And I really felt pushed into that role by the guy. So maybe she isn't happy with things the way they are either and telling her about how you perceive things differently might help?

My brother is very P and over the course of the last year I've come to realise that he will get there in his own way, in due time. So what if he starts the fire in a strategically unorthodox way, he'll get the wood burning eventually. I've come to understand the P side of myself a lot better.

Also, I don't know about your relationship, but perhaps she's afraid she'll end up with a deadbeat boyfriend? Again, no offence. INTJs tend to be very future-oriented, so perhaps she already has visions of her being stuck with 2 kids, 2 jobs and you not really making anything of your life and she's scared?

[fripping]

Also, I don't know about your relationship, but perhaps she's afraid she'll end up with a deadbeat boyfriend? Again, no offence. INTJs tend to be very future-oriented, so perhaps she already has visions of her being stuck with 2 kids, 2 jobs and you not really making anything of your life and she's scared?
kind of. she was an only child and pretty spoiled by her parents. she seems to want me to not only become a breadwinner, but someone who can help her lead the good life. so the pressure is doubled. i told her that i'm really not the kind of guy who chases after more money than he needs, but she seems pretty dead-set on my "transformation" through whoever's agency is more effective, hers or mine. maybe once i do start making a livable amount of money she'll be able to settle with reality.

she knows we're different, which she sometimes appreciates as a good thing. the rest of the time i'm just a manchild who needs some "help". from what i've read by other intjs (not on this forum) this is a pretty common attitude.

[PortInStorm]

It's probably our impatience that's driving that- for the love of mankind, it's my worst fault!! That damn drive to completion, "are we there yet?"

[JTG]

One of the things I love about my spouse is that he doesn't try to control- and the 2 or 3 times he's tried it's been an absolute disaster. When he tries to force me, it's unbelievable anger or even rage. I really try to give him the final say on most decisions, and to factor in his preferences in my decision (and ask if I'm not sure of them). However, when I feel so strongly about something that I supercede those, and he still tries to impose his way, it gets messy.

I've definitely been here before. I was with somebody who was a more dominant personality, so i let her lead for the most part. She eventually found out that i wasn't letting her lead because i'm weak, though. The first time she started pushing for something too illogical or skewed for my sensibilities to allow, i turned into an unfeeling, uncompromising, immovable rock. I actually think she felt threatened because of it, like i was going to change on her or something, because after that things got really tense for a while.

I still think she's getting used to the idea of somebody who's passive/agreeable for the most part, but can "turn on" a stubbornness when the situation calls for it, then turn it off again just as easily afterward, with no residual hard feelings or tension. Most guys she has known in the past were grudge holders i guess. I try to tell her it's not that i'm mad at all when i get like that, i just "don't go there" on some issues.

[Uytuun]

kind of. she was an only child and pretty spoiled by her parents. she seems to want me to not only become a breadwinner, but someone who can help her lead the good life. so the pressure is doubled. i told her that i'm really not the kind of guy who chases after more money than he needs, but she seems pretty dead-set on my "transformation" through whoever's agency is more effective, hers or mine.

Well, it doesn't have to be that way. She's INTJ, she most likely does really well at school and will have a thriving career in no time. She won't generally need your financial support in order to live the good life. And it's not fair to ask that of you if that's not what you want. One way of overcoming this stuff is not seeing a relationship as an "are we there yet" thing. When there are no end-points, no societal expectations or norms, when the relationship is not a teleological thing, not a goal an sich, it seems to be easier to give up the quest for perfection and just enjoy the company of an interesting companion. If any type, it's INTJ that is capable of not needing people, but allowing them in their life anyway just because they like/love them and enjoy their company.

But I suspect that this is not really doable when you follow the current relationship patterns. It clearly doesn't work when you think that a relationship is about "becoming one", because then your behaviour becomes destructive to her. It requires a certain level of detachment, maybe, if only the practical kind.

[PortInStorm]

Very true. For the longest time I was almost anal about having a thriving marriage- reading books, asking opinions, and the 'end point' was a partnership that satisfied all my needs (so I wouldn't have to be 'emotionally unfaithful *snort of derision*). So even though I was/am decently satisfied, I'd push, push for more of what the books said was a perfect relationship. Now I think I'm regulating that to more of what you say- just let the relationship be. Try your best, and leave it. And when I do leave it and look to other parts of my life for some satisfaction, it's usually then that my partner tries harder.

[rwyatt365]

Very true. For the longest time I was almost anal about having a thriving marriage- reading books, asking opinions, and the 'end point' was a partnership that satisfied all my needs (so I wouldn't have to be 'emotionally unfaithful *snort of derision*). So even though I was/am decently satisfied, I'd push, push for more of what the books said was a perfect relationship. Now I think I'm regulating that to more of what you say- just let the relationship be. Try your best, and leave it. And when I do leave it and look to other parts of my life for some satisfaction, it's usually then that my partner tries harder.
I would call that the "Mule Syndrome" (having never owned a mule I base this entirely on the stereotype). The harder you pull, push, or otherwise provoke "the mule", the more it resists. But, as soon as you cease and desist, "the mule" will get up and move forward. It's all about letting that person move under their own volition.

There is a common notion that people have to be "encouraged" to do things, that having a cheerleader present at all times will speed change. For an INT that is not true. That cheerleader becomes a constant source of irritation and annoyance – to the point that we will "sit down" and refuse to budge.

[vaguely dissatisfied]

I would call that the "Mule Syndrome" (having never owned a mule I base this entirely on the stereotype). The harder you pull, push, or otherwise provoke "the mule", the more it resists. But, as soon as you cease and desist, "the mule" will get up and move forward. It's all about letting that person move under their own volition.

There is a common notion that people have to be "encouraged" to do things, that having a cheerleader present at all times will speed change. For an INT that is not true. That cheerleader becomes a constant source of irritation and annoyance – to the point that we will "sit down" and refuse to budge.
However, it seems that for other types.........whithout the cheerleader, they would remain in blissful ignorance of anything requiring change or growth.

I call it the 'bury-your-head-in-the-sand' syndrome.

[Colette]

Although I have strong independent personality, I'd really have no desire to 'wear the pants' , as you put it, and I suspect this would (in most cases) be vaguely offensive and emasculating to my partner. I see nothing wrong with a traditional role 'reversal' (if both parties agree and it's what they want), but 'wearing the pants' implies to me that I am in control of things, and have the ability to push my partner around. That idea doesn't appeal to me at all - I would see us as equals, with an equal say in things, not one 'dominant' and one 'submissive'.

[PortInStorm]

What, never owned such a beautiful beast of burden? Oh, the bliss you miss!:) Confusing though, I've experienced the "Mule Syndrome", and also lots of the SJ head-in-the-sand. However, there are many ways to get a person's head outta there- and my pushing experience hasn't shown that technique to be particularly successful. Usually it's him coming up for air and finding me gone that works, as I say.

Re-reading this post ... doesn't sound good:embarassed: Too bad, I'm too lazy to reword it.

[JTG]

I've been in a relationship before that would have ended up as a traditional reversal of roles. Basically, she makes a ton of money, and she's very committed to her career. We discussed the possibilities of married life, and we decided that if we had kids i'd be "the one raising them" while she was "the one paying the bills" although we each would have shared the other's responsibilities to an extent.

Still, i don't think that equates to "wearing the pants" although a traditionalist (my father in particular, haha) would be mortified to see me in such a situation.

[Colette]

I've been in a relationship before that would have ended up as a traditional reversal of roles. Basically, she makes a ton of money, and she's very committed to her career. We discussed the possibilities of married life, and we decided that if we had kids i'd be "the one raising them" while she was "the one paying the bills" although we each would have shared the other's responsibilities to an extent.

Still, i don't think that equates to "wearing the pants" although a traditionalist (my father in particular, haha) would be mortified to see me in such a situation.

Umm....are you by any chance free and single at this point in time? Hand up, please ;)

*Colette wants house-husband type to keep house, clean and look after kids while she goes out and brings in the bacon*

[JTG]

Haha, i'm single at the moment, but still trying to resolve issues with the girl i mentioned above (she's ISTJ or ISFJ, can't decide) before i decide i'm ready to get into something again. Right now i'm at that in-between stage, where i'm looking but not interested in a relationship, as confusing as that sounds. I joke that i have a thing for older women because two (the two with whom i got emotionally attached actually) of the three semi-serious relationships i've had were older than i am.

I think because of my personality type, i'm kind of neutral when it comes to wearing the pants. The relationship i'm seeking closure on now was with a very dominant type. She was definitely "the boss" and it didn't bother me as long as we were getting along. Her introversion combined with a slightly controlling nature made things difficult at times. She would hesitate to express herself, and by that i mean any kind of expression of her personal needs had to be dragged out of her. If i did something she didn't approve of though, she had no problem letting her temper do the talking. It was a strange kind of dichotomy.

Before that, i was dating a girl who's younger than i am by a couple of years. She's ENFJ and we kind of traded off leadership i guess. She was definitely the more outgoing between us, so she was normally the one to initiate any kind of plans. Because of her NF i think she sought my approval a lot, and so she would ask me what i wanted to do, or make sure that i had a say in whatever plans we made. I never let myself get attached, because she and i started dating at that in-between time. I told her from the start i didn't want a relationship, and i regret that i never let myself open up to the possibility of a relationship until after she and i had split.

The other semi-relationship i've had was with a girl a couple years older than i am. She was a very defined INFJ so she had the same desire to please, but her introversion meant that i often had to be the one who made decisions or took initiative. Getting her to communicate was like pulling teeth, especially if she was worried what she had to say would upset me. We eventually split because we couldn't communicate well enough to work out some minor issues. It was sad too, she was my first love and we didn't even want to split XD

[fripping]

One way of overcoming this stuff is not seeing a relationship as an "are we there yet" thing. When there are no end-points, no societal expectations or norms, when the relationship is not a teleological thing, not a goal an sich, it seems to be easier to give up the quest for perfection and just enjoy the company of an interesting companion. If any type, it's INTJ that is capable of not needing people, but allowing them in their life anyway just because they like/love them and enjoy their company.

a good start, which leads into the next quote. . .
I would call that the "Mule Syndrome" (having never owned a mule I base this entirely on the stereotype). The harder you pull, push, or otherwise provoke "the mule", the more it resists. But, as soon as you cease and desist, "the mule" will get up and move forward. It's all about letting that person move under their own volition.

this is such a neatly encapsulated metaphor that i quoted it directly to her. she really got it. not that i won't have to say it again, but next time i'll just say "remember the mule?" and we'll have something to work with.

[Santana28]

Umm....are you by any chance free and single at this point in time? Hand up, please ;)

*Colette wants house-husband type to keep house, clean and look after kids while she goes out and brings in the bacon*

colette, mine will be available soon ;) he's also an EXCELLENT cook. hehe.