Welcome to INTJ Forum

This is a community where INTJs can meet others with similar personalities and discuss a wide variety of both serious and casual topics. If you aren't an INTJ, you're welcome to join anyway if you would like to learn more about this personality type or participate in our discussions. Registration is free and will allow you to post messages, see hidden subforums, customize your account and use other features only available to our members.


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About vampyroteuthis

  • Rank
    Core Member


  • MBTI


  • Homepage
  • Gender
  • Personal Text
    Eat the lamplight.

Recent Profile Visitors

17,478 profile views
  1. From what you've written I'm getting the sense that this wasn't so much someone setting out with a long-term plan to cheat or trick you into having sex as it was an immature and volatile person who hasn't quite learned to relate to women as equals or see them as whole people. That can lead to the kind of coercive and manipulative douchebaggery you described. It sounds like he put you on a pedestal for a while and then when he found himself dealing with a real person in a real relationship, panicked and emotionally shut down because it didn't fit his idealized image. It can be very hard to tell the difference between being idealized and being genuinely cared for, and it can take a while and some not so great experiences to develop a better filter to tell them apart. That's not a flaw in your judgment. It just has a lot to do with what society tells us romance must look like. And in a way, liking someone who seems to like you so much can feel like an emotionally safe bet when other life changes may be making you feel vulnerable. I'm thinking of Albus Dumbledore saying something about how, because he was so smart, his mistakes were correspondingly larger. I've known so many, many intelligent women who've been through things like this. (I like to think I'm one of them.) You sound like you're really smart and probably used to getting things right. One downside to that is that when you miss something, that failure can seem huge. But that perception is in relation to your usual acuity. Emotions can be a blind spot for anyone.
  2. Yes. What you're describing is pretty normal in the US. I was a bit weirded out too when I first got here. (I was 17.) I was used to people either inviting me to hang out with them and a group of friends at a get-together, and getting my number and talking on the phone a lot for several days before suggesting a date with just the two of us. It still seems more low-key and romantic to me to get to know someone through long conversations and messages first. I don't like the idea of going on a date with someone I just met, with the cultural expectation to have sex on the third date. That kind of dating in general feels very contrived and unromantic to me, though I know that that's my own acculturation speaking. One thing that could help is thinking about and practicing ways to politely say no. Easiest, though not very honest, option is to find an opportunity to casually mention in the conversation that you have a boyfriend/girlfriend, if you're talking to someone you don't think you'd want to later befriend.
  3. I completely agree. It's not unfair for either one of them to make a decision about wanting or not wanting to adopt these children, but it does sound like a lack of agreement there will make it very hard to continue the relationship as is, and would probably require very drastic changes to the marriage and living arrangements to prevent it from foundering. I feel for both parties in this situation. I agree that marriage can often entail sacrifices but it sounds like this person is fairly certain of their reluctance to raise children. And I don't think that's unfair. The problem with a "fair try" is that it would essentially be treating the children's care like an experiment. Not desirable unless there really is no other alternative. I don't think she's a victim. I think it's a sad situation that's hard on everyone involved. But I still think you're seeing childcare as something that people should want, or be willing to take on, as if it's not such a big difficulty -- and I think for some people it really is. EDIT: Re. the first part of your post... Thank you.
  4. I think this is the crux of our disagreement. Not everyone has this ability. More than that, I think assuming that everyone possesses the same general evolutionary drive is dangerous. This kind of thinking prevents people from seeing when a child is in a bad situation, because they assume that the adults around them will rise to the occasion. I'm not speaking about this as a remote abstraction. I understand that whatever the OP wrote about the future is presupposition. But what you're saying sounds a lot like the argument that people who choose to be childless don't know their own mind. I'm also really not seeing why it's "selfish" not to want children. Is the assumption then that raising children is an act of kindness or generosity? ...... added to this post 2 minutes later: Why the moral judgment and equation of marriage with having children? I'm still not seeing why preferring not to have children is automatically "self-centered" while preferring to have them is seen not as an individual preference but as some great act of moral superiority. I know. Nothing in the OP has suggested that these are the only two options.
  5. This seems unfair. Some people just don't want to raise children, period. I don't see why people need to be shamed or punished for that, especially as this shame seems most often directed at women. I have literally never seen anyone accuse a man of selfishness or meanness for not wanting to raise a child. The husband is perfectly within his rights to decide that he wants to raise these children, in which case the marriage may be in jeopardy. That's sad and can't be easy for the wife in this position. From the point of view of what's best for the child, placing them with a reluctant caregiver is a terrible idea and seems like it should be a last resort, not a default. But clearly determining willingness gets complicated by societal attitudes that shame people for not wanting or feeling prepared to take care of kids. That's the same attitude that prevents mothers with bad postpartum depression from seeking help. It's not a "lack of ability to adapt," it's a lack of ability to handle caring for children. For some people it's fairly easy to think of raising a child and for others it just isn't. People also have all kinds of experience and exposure that contribute to this. Part of the problem is that we tend to think caregiving is or should be innate and then see it as a moral failure when it isn't.
  6. ∆ link
  7. I like to think of them having a huddle like before a handegg game, but without the violence or merchandise and with a lot of mutual affirmation and gentle pats on the shoulder. Maybe afterwards there's a chat spa with some team building and everyone comes out with their pores clear.
  8. Yes. Quoting you two to emphasize this. OP, your friend doesn't have to commit to raising children she doesn't want. She does have a moral responsibility to be honest about this. If she's thinking that staying quiet and agreeing to take in the children when she doesn't want them is doing anyone any favours, I think that alone is a clear indication that she shouldn't be in a position of power over them. Childcare is a serious commitment; it shouldn't be an act of reluctant charity or a means to an end.
  9. I've been eyeing that and wondering whether to take the plunge! What do you think of it, if you don't mind my asking?
  10. It would be really sad for the kids to end up in the care of an adult who resents their presence. It will manifest in the kind of care they're given and they will pick up on it and it will do damage. At the very least, the husband should be told how the wife feels in this scenario, so he can make an informed decision about what kind of future and environment he might be offering the children. No, she should not be made responsible if she doesn't want to be, but it may mean that the marriage can't work, at least not with them living together. I don't think there's a clear blanket principle you can apply to these situations in the way that you've framed it.
  11. Thanks!
  12. Yeah... I kind of like having the curly parts curly and the straight parts straight, though. Like I said, I think this is a distinct aesthetic preference.
  13. I recently told someone that I was disappointed in weather.com for repeatedly postponing the snow. (Meant it as a joke but I don't think they read it that way.) They said weather.com is really unreliable and I should always check the Weather Channel's website instead. weather.com is the Weather Channel's website. This person has brought this up twice since then but I can't bring myself to say anything. I don't generally have trouble asserting myself so I doubt that's the issue here. Not sure why I'm having trouble saying something. Do you correct people's mistakes when you notice them? Why or why not? How? And under what conditions?
  14. Hmm. I looked up pictures of Ouidad haircuts and while I can see why people would go for this -- it's a lovely look -- the end result is a bit too uniform for me. I like that my hair has a bit of variation in texture and looks slightly wild. If you want bouncy curls of roughly even size going all the way up your head this definitely seems like the way to go but I think it really is a very specific look. To me it seemed a bit more femme-presenting than anything I do.
  15. Sweet, thank you! Does this work better with hair or without?