Natasha Tori Maru

@Sincerity hahaha! It's giving Eat, Pray, Love women's midlife crisis new age spirituality derp ( ⁠⊙⁠_⁠◎⁠)

Stage coral would kiss, makeup and forgive 🥹

Where the fuck is @Ulax when we need him 🥲

I'll be a good girl now

I view this as a function of development and maturity. Not so much MBTI.

@AION GUILTY !!!

We have several members GUILTY AS CHARGED!

Otherwise we are just hammers treating everything as nails

Half the problem is - if the other party doesn't deem that mode of connection useful or contributing to THEIR intention - they will disregard the attempt at connection. Some people are blind to the fact that their points will land and be received with ease when the other person feels truly seen and validated.

It is fair to feel that way. But notice that some of the bad feeling may be due to the contradiction in rejecting others for something you also engage in yourself. While noticing that won't remove the feelings associated with strong individualism, it may help to make it more bearable

But the experience you speak of - it is just one datapoint. There are many factors to consider that may be hidden. And this isn't even to speak of cognitive bias - we each filter out things we do not wish to see so we can confirm a hypothesis.

If disarming was the intention the opposite happened! You guys both armoured up The only way to disarm is to properly relate to each other - understand each others meaning. Be seen. Need relational questions and probing to do that. It is hard to relate to others and receive when we have something to prove. Listening goes out the window.

You will never be seen or understood if all you do is reflect.

Turned into a quick crashout. What stands out to me is presenting yourself as an individualist who rejects tribal thinking. You reject people for categorizing you according to group identity - but then you also categorize huge numbers of people according to group identity? Stage orange, stage blue -- "ew" There is a bit of cognitive dissonance here that might help to be deconstructed. It could be contributing to some of the emotional distress you're experiencing.

Triggering people and provoking to make a point is uncharitable, though.

@LordFall Correct me if I am mistaken - you are separating inherent value from practical value? So, if I understand you correctly, you're distinguishing inherent human worth from instrumental or relational value? People may have some baseline value simply by being alive, but who we choose to invest our limited time and energy in is necessarily based on a contextual form of value - and this is the context from which you typically reply on the forums? If so that clears up a lot. Many users feel valid and valuable just as they are, intrinsically. There might be some confusion around context.

Slam dunk. Agree with this also. I do what I personally enjoy and its not about providing value. It just so happens my work has a lot of external value due to all of (if not all, I would argue) society inherently requiring hospital infrastructure. I couldn't give one fick about status, hierarchies or measuring up to someone else's standards. It is intrinsic motivation vs extrinsic. There is another issue being circled around - when someone's behaviour does not fit Lordfall's preferred interpretation, he infers an underlying pathology that explains their disagreement, rather than first considering whether his interpretation of their behaviour is simply wrong. Or simply just, you know, asking relational questions to ensure he has understood? It tends to convert an interpretation into an explanation of the person without sufficient evidence. And often, no evidence is actually given to warrant the conclusion - it is poor reasoning and epistemology. Real turnoff.

@LordFall Do you think people have inherent value and are worthy, just as they are? How does this tie into the concept of a person being valid, and how you do define validity?

Regarding @Sugarcoat I see Ni, Fi, Te & Se but also some Ne (a LOT of possibilities constantly being generated by her). I don't see Fi dom (my brother and sister are both Fi doms). From past comments I do see Fi but it is always embedded in a very abstract analytical process. There isn't a lot of value based "this is how I feel" and more an immediate jump to "why is this happening?' What structure explains this?" "Does this follow or could there be another possibility". Which is why Sugarcoat's posts are strange because they come across as quite personal but wrapped in abstractions. Te is odd because it is present but not dominant at all. Lots of category distinguishing, testing explanations, contradiction IDing, etc but much less of "Here is the objectively correct framework therefore here are the premises. This is the conclusion, now we apply it." But the Te component could be extraverted more in some real life application that isn't transparent from forum posts. IE how @Joshe or I operate with substantial Te being implemented in concrete reality and a touch less so on the forum (but still very much there). Joshe's Te floods into his work as does mine in construction. But the strongest argument against INTJ is her relational style. But this could be societal conditioning due to being female. I see personal resonance in her interpersonal nuance, sensitivity to emotional states, peoples interpretation of each other, psychological suffering. But this doesn't really jump out at me as either Fe or Fi. I see much more Fi though. I am decidedly uncertain.

Good morning boss! Wake up @Leo Gura! Rise & shine for a new day 🌞 Spin your magic for this lovely lady ☺️

If with Ralston, make it soon. I don't think he is in the best health ❤️

@Juan I don't block or delete people. If you encounter someone in the streets, it doesn't have any bearing on blocking and deleting. It's not literal. Just a small measure of boundaries where we can draw them.

Definitely I agree with this. We interpret events by default. Survival mechanism of the brain. If we take away the wrong understanding of what has transpired, we can end up on self blame. Shame. Guilt. These issues are so common and are at the root of many problems we carry unconsciously. Even from rather benign events. It is all in how we interpret the event and our subsequent relationship to the memory and feeling. This is why parenting and early models of love are so important; a parent can help us correct our understanding of an event and resolve responsibility. Trauma can be loosely defined as the inability to resolve responsibility of a past event. I should have been more diligent with my explanation above. PTSD and C-PTSD have a wide constellation of other issues needed for diagnosis. But we typically only seek help when we are almost non-functional.

Depth, complexity and pathways to healing. Most notably the sort of debilitation involved in what some people ascribe to trauma would more properly be assigned to PTSD or C-PTSD. Because as soon as trauma begins to impede our functioning on a day to day level to the point we cannot function, it begins to become closer to diagnosable as one of these two pathologies. Trauma isn't a diagnosis in and of itself. But PTSD and C-PTSD are. There are more markers that qualify for a diagnosis of either of these two issues, I will add. Trauma and it's related conditions can be associated with maturity. But trauma, PTSD and C-PTSD =/= immaturity by default. I think when people say trauma and label it as incapacitating it is usually a pointer to a pathology (PTSD, C-PTSD or another condition entirely). I am sort of against a lot of the therapizing rheroric that is commonly online (I digress!).

@Valach I think online trauma, PTSD and C-PTSD are conflated.