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 WhatTheFunction

  • Rank


  • MBTI
  • Enneagram
  • Personal DNA
    Reserved Idealist
  • Brain Dominance


  • Gender
  1. Is that not what he's doing now? Whether or not it came up at the very beginning or the end it sounds as though they are talking about it. So what are you saying?
  2. Scott Pilgrim huh, good choice :D!!! One of my favorite movies. Even though alot needed to be explained from the comic, they did a pretty good job I guess.

  3. The idea of having a child literally frightens me.
  4. I think I can understand direct/indirect in your definition by how I treat time spent with certain people I know. My partner and I like to spend direct quality time together whereas if I'm with my friends I much prefer all interactions are indirect. I have a friend who likes direct quality time with everyone, individually. He's an ESFJ so Fe-Dom.
  5. Curios as why it's backwards? I think when you look at it you say "equality" as treating everyone equal no matter what part of he socioeconomic ladder they're on and "justice" is what people mean when they say not necessarily treating people equally but putting everyone on equal terms. I guess it depends on what one person considers justice and what their interpretation of equality means. I can see why you're saying its backwards though, if we're taking the literal term of justice which is impartial and all that but this is taking a critique at society's views of the terms, I think. Also is this a stab at liberal views or am I thinking too far into it?
  6. I don't know why this thread title was so elusive to everyone else but I think I have an idea of what the OP meant. Forgive me if I'm putting words into your mouth but what I got out of this was, "Why do INTJs believe they're superior?" And I've noticed this a bit in the INTJf but I wouldn't call it superiority honestly there does tend to be a lot of confrontation, though, especially on threads that are more prone to arguments that are based on relative belief structures. This perceived "superiority", I was told (and sort of guesses but still can't make a final call on it), was their dominant Ni coupled with Te. It's not that INTJs think they're better (which could be argued given some of the relational threads and the excuses for loneliness) but just that the way they recite their ideas is a bit harsh. This is especially true if someone disagrees with them. I've noticed some are afraid of being wrong (or at least truly believe they aren't) so instead of looking at their own argument, they begin to "attack" (using loosely, can't think of another word) the other person. Maybe people see this as superiority?
  7. I'm a Black woman and I have an Asian boyfriend. This just sort of happened, though. I don't "prefer" them.
  8. I don't think it's weird to be on the internet after sex. There was this one time I was on the internet while having sex. Well, it was pre-sex insertion. I think it's kind of fun to pretend that what I'm reading online is so much more interesting than the task at hand, because then it gives my partner a chance to be more demanding. Post-sex, I generally want more sex. When I'm finally done with all of that, I probably will start reading something online not that I need to have it, but I read a lot so I just go about my business.
  9. It's kind of funny you say that when they deliberately make Pam to be unattractive (the nasal-y high-pitched voice, the dumpy-like figure, her eating habits) and have on-going jokes about her weight and her superhuman strength (which I think is supposed to make her less feminine or something). Avid Archer watcher. Actually, I'm honestly obsessed.
  10. I kind of think of it this way: information is information. I've read through every post in this thread, have talked to my roommate/boyfriend about the thread and they now have new information to discuss with other people. That's how awareness works. Not to mention, you can search these threads. If someone had an idea about this and wanted to search it on Google, they could find this exact thread and read it and there you go more people are informed. And it's not necessarily about getting people to side with what you believe, but it's about getting them to think and question already held beliefs in our society. Getting ideas out is vital no matter which medium you use because people talk. Who's to say Facebook is any more effective? What if they didn't have that many friends on Facebook? It's a ripple effect, honestly.
  11. I'm 6'0" and a woman. I'm pretty sure I'm considered "tall" or "too tall" to some people. When I was younger, I was really ashamed of my height. I felt like it made me less feminine. As I got older, I shook that mentality and completely separated the idea of height and femininity entirely. I try my best to overlook (see what I did there) height when selecting a mate. I don't think it's any sort of deal-breaker. Of course, people have told me "If you were shorter, I'd date you" which I found a bit offensive so I never want to say to someone, "If you were taller, I'd date you." It's just a really trivial trait to not date someone over, imo. I consider people under 5'7" short just because I can see clearly over their head.
  12. Your responses in this thread have been mature and responsible. Thank you.

  13. I think the fact I had a stance against this without really knowing how the legal system worked just proves how ill-informed people are about rape and its effects in society. (I mean I'm not saying my own ignorance means everyone is ignorant but it's just a prime example, really.) We're not informed, this society. I think something like this should be taught to people so they really understand what the lines are between rape. For us, it may seem like a no-brainer (on what rape is) but for others, it may be a bit cloudy. I believe people should be informed. ---------- Post added 03-24-2013 at 10:16 AM ---------- Agree, to an extent. I guess I have this whole "give people the benefit of the doubt" when it comes to certain crimes but then again I guess that's why there are misdemeanors, etc to begin with.
  14. I'm obviously implying what happens in regards to work, going to college, dealing with the government and anything that has to deal with the more work-related downfalls of being a sex offender and not the societal implications or whether or not people think of you differently. ---------- Post added 03-24-2013 at 10:06 AM ---------- Yeah, I started looking it up right now. Found out some things about the tiers in being a sex offender and the like. I'm still looking but my questions are being answered.
  15. But why isn't there technicality? If two people are drunk and no one passes out, one person could still be considered a rapist? Why? Is that not harsh to you? I agree forced intercourse is not okay. Forced unconscious intercourse is not okay. But what about neither forced nor unconscious intercourse? Now we're saying "well if they're drunk then their judgement is altered therefore it's not explicit consent." Okay, but both parties are drunk, neither one is forced and someone wakes up and says "Wow, I just had sex with the most revolting person in my life, I can get away shameless and say it was rape since I'm drunk." And that's not right. It's something, like I said, we can't measure. And yes, it's technical. There are loopholes and pitfalls in this system and innocent people are being held accountable for actions that have no ill-intent. I'm not saying this happens the majority of the time; I can't gauge that. But it's a possibility and it's something we should prepare for. I don't disagree with you. Everything you're saying makes sense, as it should. It generally is an "easy concept" but it's not easily applied because alcohol really, really changes the situation and it's unfortunate instances of rape include some sort of form of an alcohol-induced state. It's, to me, just as wrong for people to be given such a harsh sentence if it's not harsh. You're saying every act of rape should be given the same punishment, I'm saying it shouldn't. This is where we disagree. I think different forms of rape (yes, all rape is bad) should be given different judicial reprimands because being labeled a felon/sex offender is huge. The punishment should match the crime. Obviously various degrees of this already exist, this is why there is sexual assault and that is just as important to address but now I think what should be classified as sexual assault is now being classified as rape and they are judicial distinct. I am being technical about it but it needs to be technical. This is important. I'm not trying to loophole rape and say "well, this is rape and this isn't rape." I really think we should come up with clearer definitions on these things. Please consider the grey area that you're so willingly overlooking because it exists and it's putting innocent people in jail.