Controlling people

[InaF3157]

I can understand wanting strict control of yourself, but please explain to me people who have an interventionist, controlling approach to other people. What goes on in your mind? Is it lack of self-control?

[ajblaise]

Cuz they want others to do what they want and what will benefit them.

But I'm not an ENTJ, so I don't know what goes on in their mind.

[InaF3157]

It's not just ENTJs, unfortunately. I want people do what I want, too, but take a hands off approach that leans more on persuasion and "living with it" when that doesn't work.

[Jack Flak]

If I notice someone seeming "lost," I often offer advice. Sometimes it isn't appreciated. Still, I remain informative and not directive in my exchanges in most circumstances.

[InaF3157]

Yes, I do that. I meant more in the way of self-serving attempts to control other people.

[ajblaise]

It's not just ENTJs, unfortunately. I want people do what I want too, but take a hands off approach that leans more on persuasion and "living with it" when that doesn't work.

Well it must work out for them to some degree if they keep doing it. And maybe they are just simply selfish and bad at subtle persuasion.

[InaF3157]

Well it must work out for them to some degree if they keep doing it. And maybe they are just simply selfish and bad at subtle persuasion.

It's weird. I will only be interventionist if it is to help the person, not to serve my own interests. (e.g.: you're not drunk driving without me trying to get you not to).
I had a friend in college, who, if I agreed to do early breakfast the next morning, would not leave it to me to get up and meet in time. She would give me an unsolicited wake up call to make sure (but hang up as soon as I picked up). Gee, i wonder who that could be.
That shit pissed me off! Guess who no longer had an appetite for breakfast?

[ajblaise]

It's weird. I will only be interventionist if it is to help the person, not to serve my own interests. (e.g.: you're not drunk driving without me trying to get you not to).
I had a friend in college, who, if I agreed to do early breakfast the next morning, would not leave it to me to get up and meet in time. She would give me an unsolicited wake up call to make sure (but hang up as soon as I picked up). Gee, i wonder who that could be.
That shit pissed me off! Guess who no longer had an appetite for breakfast?

wah that'd be annoying. sounds like major Jism with a hint of selfishness.

I can be kinda pushy too if I think what I'm trying to help/convince someone with is in their best interest. I do it, because while sometimes it can take some time, but often at the end, they are like "ohhhh, i see".

[Jack Flak]

My dad can occasionally be like that, and I never let him get away with it (gain any tactical advantage), because I'm a cold son-of-a-gun.

He's a P though, I believe.

[InaF3157]

Yeah, I get extremely ornery in the circumstances and will, to borrow from another thread title, pull a "cut the nose off to spite the face" or otherwise malinger as a grand fuck-off.
Take the above example, I'd make sure to be a few minutes late or just change my mind if sufficiently annoyed.

[Jack Flak]

Yeah, I get extremely ornery in the circumstances and will, to borrow from another thread title pull a "cut the nose off to spite the face" or otherwise malinger as a grand fuck-off.
Take the above example, I'd make sure to be a few minutes late or just change my mind if sufficiently annoyed.
LOL. I was doing my dad a huge favor, renting a truck & driving all over two states with him. Told him I'd rather go solo, but if he came I was in charge (because we disagree on how to do everything).

On the way back he started whining about "why can't we do it this way," we got in a nice verbal tussel, and I said "If you say one more f***in' thing about it, I'm driving all the way back right now." It was like 1am, with four hours to go. He had to say something else, and it wasn't a nice thing, so I drove all night.

The story isn't to illustrate how innocent and righteous I am, of course. Just that I don't like uninvited control. :)

[InaF3157]

:)
If only some controlling people would share their thought processes in this thread.

Come out come out wherever you are! I promise not to berate you. Just trying to understand so I don't get the urge to decapitate the next one of you to pull your stunts.

[ajblaise]

If I sense that someone is trying to order me around or control me, it seems like I automatically will not do, or will do whatever half-ass, even if what they want me to do is what I really want to do too.

[Jack Flak]

If I sense that someone is trying to order me around or control me, it seems like I automatically will not do, or will do whatever half-ass, even if what they want me to do is what I really want to do too.
Some people call that Passive Aggression. I call it an awesome way to go about dealing with assholes.

[Jennifer]

I can understand wanting strict control of yourself, but please explain to me people who have an interventionist, controlling approach to other people. What goes on in your mind? Is it lack of self-control?

I think that the desire to control other's behavior towards us is deep-seated in every human being.

At some level, we're always vying for approval, jockeying for position, looking for affirmation/validation, trying to get get control to implement our vision/plans for ourselves, etc.

Some people operate from these underlying motivations to interfere in other people's lives, without even realizing they're doing it.

Other people's convictions about what they want or what they think is "right" leads them to consciously think it's okay to impose directly upon others to implement their plans.

[prplchknz]

I have no clue, but I do not like them. My room mates mom was here, when were moving into the apartment. And I was doing laundry and then she criticized the way I did laundry, and I was like thank you, but I've been doing this since I was about 12 it's worked for me all this time. Please if I ask for help thats one thing, but I know how to do laundry on my own.

[InaF3157]

Other people's convictions about what they want or what they think is "right" leads them to consciously think it's okay to impose directly upon others to implement their plans.

These are the people I don't understand . . . the imposition! Is it ok to them because they would not mind being on the receiving end of it, or are they just above recognizing the sanctity of others' space (mental and physical)?

[ajblaise]

Is it ok to them because they would not mind being on the receiving end of it

I don't know, I made an attempt to act bossy to a very bossy person I know before, and they just called me bossy.

[Jack Flak]

These are the people I don't understand . . . the imposition! Is it ok to them because they would not mind being on the receiving end of it, or are they just above recognizing the sanctity of others' space (mental and physical)?

I don't know, I made an attempt to act bossy to a very bossy person I know before, and they just called me bossy.
People are oblivious in general.

[ajblaise]

People are oblivious in general.

Or choose to not care or address the issues they have.

[Trinity]

:)
If only some controlling people would share their thought processes in this thread.

Come out come out wherever you are! I promise not to berate you. Just trying to understand so I don't get the urge to decapitate the next one of you to pull your stunts.

You! Here! Now!

Other people's convictions about what they want or what they think is "right" leads them to consciously think it's okay to impose directly upon others to implement their plans.

That's the way I see it. Everyone thinks they know best (particually them dang NTs :D)

[Jennifer]

These are the people I don't understand . . . the imposition! Is it ok to them because they would not mind being on the receiving end of it, or are they just above recognizing the sanctity of others' space (mental and physical)?

A variety of motivations.

Remember the three "relating styles" of karen Horney, absorbed into Enneagram theory?

- Moving Towards (2's, ISFJ, etc.)
- Moving Against (8's, ExTJ, etc.)
- Moving Away (5's, INTP, etc.)

Some people have a natural inclination to dominate others. It's their natural mode. They feel insecure if they are not in charge. When unsure, they'll dominate.

Other people have religious/personal beliefs where they think they're doing what is "good for the other person and/or the world" by imposing on them. (Hence all the political arguments nowadays with religious people, as an example.) They know better; therefore it is their job to protect you against yourself.

Parents and those granted authority status also impose on others as part of their position, sometimes in bad ways. Again, it's a "duty."

And of course there are those who are just purely selfish/egotistical and disregard the feelings of others. Their needs and wants are more important; and they force others to accommodate them rather than working towards a reasonable compromise.

That's the way I see it. Everyone thinks they know best (particually them dang NTs :D)

I know, I'm sorry.

If we weren't so RIGHT all the time, it would be easier to back off.

I have no clue, but I do not like them

...sam I am.

[InaF3157]

You! Here! Now!
:run:
And of course there are those who are just purely selfish/egotistical and disregard the feelings of others. Their needs and wants are more important; and they force others to accommodate them rather than working towards a reasonable compromise.
These. Where it should be apparent that the iron fist approach is counterproductive, it puzzles me when they keep on with it. I'm guessing this may have something to do with it:

Some people have a natural inclination to dominate others. It's their natural mode. They feel insecure if they are not in charge. When unsure, they'll ^attempt to^ dominate.
:thinking:

[Jennifer]

:run:
These. Where it should be apparent that the iron fist approach is counterproductive, it puzzles me when they keep on with it. I'm guessing this may have something to do with it...
:thinking:

It seems pretty typical to me.

My natural mode is to withdraw (avoid the danger when I'm anxious).
I only engage if I have to.

If I do engage, my next mode is to connect/placate. (Again, avoid the danger.)

Only if all else fails, or if I feel I have a good sense of the danger and the risk is acceptable, will I "fight" with someone and use some sort of direct active force. (Tp me, active fighting results in the most potential loss.)

The dominators, meanwhile, feel safest when they are on the offensive. They feel worse when they try to placate or when they run and hide.

[substitute]

I can understand wanting strict control of yourself, but please explain to me people who have an interventionist, controlling approach to other people. What goes on in your mind? Is it lack of self-control?

Cos they think they're helping. They have difficulty in discerning that fine line between constructive, solicited help and unwanted, interfering busy-bodying, and confuse the two. They see somebody in a situation that they would not be happy in and reason that the problem needs to be solved, and set about forcing the person to do what would work for them, not having learned to first check whether the other person even is unhappy with their situation, or wants help, or that their solution is universally applicable.

Difficult as it is to bear in mind when you're the subject of it, when you've become somebody's project... the most usual thing is that they honestly think they're helping. And even that they know what's good for you - even better than you do.

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." - C. S. Lewis

[Jack Flak]

C.S. Lewis said it, right about there.

[InaF3157]

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." - C. S. Lewis

As someone who has been on the receiving end of tyranny exercised for the tyrants benefit (which is what I'm most interested in here), I can say that it's not a bunch of roses, either.

It is somewhat related to that phenomenon of arguing with a brick wall. I tend to avoid it. If it is clear to me the point is not to discuss but simply to state and defend by any means one position and there will be no budging on it, I am not interested. They go their way and I go mine. Yet I've seen people who get into the same lengthy and fevered discussion with the same people over and over again and wonder why they do it if they don't have to.

[Jennifer]

As someone who has been on the receiving end of tyranny exercised for the tyrants benefit (which is what I'm most interested in here), I can say that it's not a bunch of roses, either.

It is if all the petals have fallen off and all you have left is thorns.

(Think big!)

[colmena]

I was a very dominating child. My parents still call me "Boss".

I'd like to better my ability at helping people learn for themselves. Show them the things I encountered that led to my values, rather than just saying mine are "right".

I guess it stems from a lack of trust; that humanity can't think for themselves. And when you study psychology, the lack of independent thought is quite obvious. The Century of the Self (http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/other-psychology-topics/7587-radical-lesbian-nuns.html) is a good example.

I guess political/business manipulation will topple on itself when education has been pushed far enough.

[Nocapszy]

It's 'cause, some people are inconsiderate.
They don't know that I'm after different things than they are. When I don't succeed in accomplishing what they thought I wanted to, they try to correct me.

They think they're an altruist, but they didn't even bother to research my goal.
Well, even if they did, they'll say that I'm wrong for wanting that instead of the same thing they want.

[InaF3157]

I was a very dominating child. My parents still call me "Boss".

I'd like to better my ability at helping people learn for themselves. Show them the things I encountered that led to my values, rather than just saying mine are "right".

I guess it stems from a lack of trust; that humanity can't think for themselves. And when you study psychology, the lack of independent thought is quite obvious. The Century of the Self (http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/other-psychology-topics/7587-radical-lesbian-nuns.html) is a good example.

I guess political/business manipulation will topple on itself when education has been pushed far enough.
Aha, so one of them finally outs self! Gotcha.

Lack of trust. hmm . . . I can see that, but is it because you were given reason not to trust or is it just a general lack of faith in people?

[InaF3157]

It's 'cause, some people are inconsiderate.
They don't know that I'm after different things than they are. When I don't succeed in accomplishing what they thought I wanted to, they try to correct me.

But what if you are after the same goal, yet the controlling intervenor cannot leave you to meet at the designated point, and instead disregards your boundaries to make sure you are there the way they want you to get there? why.the.hell?

[Nocapszy]

That sounds more like a compulsion.
But this thread sounds more like a gripe.

Things are never what you think they are anymore.
I'm getting confused.

[InaF3157]

Yes, it does seem compulsive to me. If I did not have a habit of being late for our meet ups, but she has to make sure I'm up when she thinks I should be up, and must call, then I have to wonder if she's in control of her faculties. This reasoning is more convincing to me because she hung up when I picked up, suggesting that she's aware that this was boundary crossing, but went ahead and did it anyway.

[substitute]

As someone who has been on the receiving end of tyranny exercised for the tyrants benefit (which is what I'm most interested in here), I can say that it's not a bunch of roses, either.

It is somewhat related to that phenomenon of arguing with a brick wall. I tend to avoid it. If it is clear to me the point is not to discuss but simply to state and defend by any means one position and there will be no budging on it, I am not interested. They go their way and I go mine. Yet I've seen people who get into the same lengthy and fevered discussion with the same people over and over again and wonder why they do it if they don't have to.

Yeah, I've had an intense experience of this over the past year or so with a certain INFJ priest... just absolutely no willingness to budge, to move, to alter anything at all on account of my views or anyone else's, as far as I can tell. Even when the majority of the congregation clearly is against him, is clearly in favour of some improvement I've suggested that's in everyone's interest... nope. This guy has his routine, his way of doing things, he likes everything *just so* and it's like that for a REASON dontcha know... (ha, yeah, the reason being it makes things easier for HIM), so don't even bother going there. :steam:

I don't think this one is about type so much as just selfishness and stubbornness, which can infect any person of any type...

[Jennifer]

But what if you are after the same goal, yet the controlling intervenor cannot leave you to meet at the designated point, and instead disregards your boundaries to make sure you are there the way they want you to get there? why.the.hell?

Who is this again?

The motivation potential changes based on context.
(A parent or boss might do this for different reasons than a friend.)

My INTJ boss used to be a control freak, until he had heart issues.
It taught him a BIG lesson on how to "let go."
Now he's been the opposite (in the good ways) for five years or so.

(Although occasionally anytime there is a problem he immediately tries to Te the problem and tell me exactly how to solve it... based on HIS style... and it comes across as a command. e.g., "Call so-and-so on the phone right now and ask them X, Y, and Z.")

[Anja]

With some people I think it might be OCD. It certainly is a personal sense of security issue - manipulating "things" to calm one's self.

[Nocapszy]

OCD is a myth.
Jamie and Adam proved it.

[Nocapszy]

Who is this again?

The motivation potential changes based on context.
(A parent or boss might do this for different reasons than a friend.)

My INTJ boss used to be a control freak, until he had heart issues.
It taught him a BIG lesson on how to "let go."
Now he's been the opposite (in the good ways) for five years or so.

(Although occasionally anytime there is a problem he immediately tries to Te the problem and tell me exactly how to solve it... based on HIS style... and it comes across as a command. e.g., "Call so-and-so on the phone right now and ask them X, Y, and Z.")

I always like to list conceit, a specific brand of it, as the cause.
That is, to my controlling father, I mention how conceited he is for thinking that I wanted to do things his way, or that I had the same goals, and that his judgement is better etc.

But that might be because I have some kind of odd obsession with conceit.

[colmena]

Aha, so one of them finally outs self! Gotcha.

I've only just seen the thread.


Lack of trust. hmm . . . I can see that, but is it because you were given reason not to trust or is it just a general lack of faith in people?

I provided a handy semi-colon and part-explanation. Lack of independent thought, manipulation, lack of respect for nature etc.

I can't think properly because people are making noise around me.

[InaF3157]

I always like to list conceit, a specific brand of it, as the cause.
That is, to my controlling father, I mention how conceited he is for thinking that I wanted to do things his way, or that I had the same goals, and that his judgement is better etc.

But that might be because I have some kind of odd obsession with conceit.
Me too, a lil bit. :smile:
With this girl, she wasn't generally conceited, though. And her border crossing was sometimes to be really sweet.

I provided a handy semi-colon and part-explanation. Lack of independent thought, manipulation, lack of respect for nature etc.
I know - I was looking for more information on the distrust you mentioned as applied to individuals (generic v. particularized), but no worries. Noisy people throw me off, too.

[Nocapszy]

Me too, a lil bit. :smile:
With this girl, she wasn't generally conceited, though. And her border crossing was sometimes to be really sweet. True enough.

I am conceited, usually appropriately, and I'm the least controlling person I know.

[colmena]

I know - I was looking for more information on the distrust you mentioned as applied to individuals (generic v. particularized), but no worries. Noisy people throw me off, too.

I don't really distrust individuals, and I don't control them. I show them what I'm into, if they identify, that's cool. If they don't, that's cool.

I'm patient and respectful of people I'm fond of, and I expect the same in return. But this is more relationships than psychology.

What sort of dynamic are you inquiring about? I've mentioned individuals and the masses, I haven't really dipped into other circles.

[Jennifer]

I always like to list conceit, a specific brand of it, as the cause. That is, to my controlling father, I mention how conceited he is for thinking that I wanted to do things his way, or that I had the same goals, and that his judgement is better etc.

My dad's the same way.

Then again, he grew up in a social environment (40's/50's) where the father was "God," and he was expected to be unflappable, not be wrong, make decisions for the family, discipline the children ("bad cop"), etc.

And his dad was an anal ISTJ engineer. Yeah.

But that might be because I have some kind of odd obsession with conceit.

I'd say my dad's pretty conceited too. He's always right... because his ego is so weak he can't afford to be wrong, and he doesn't have enough discipline to deprive himself so as to indulge reasonable compromises with others.

[Hmm]

It sounds bad but some people are better off being controlled. *hides*

[InaF3157]

I'm patient and respectful of people I'm fond of, and I expect the same in return. But this is more relationships than psychology.
Hmm . . . you're probably less able to shed light on this type of controlling behavior then.

What sort of dynamic are you inquiring about? I've mentioned individuals and the masses, I haven't really dipped into other circles.
Ok.
This kind, which I've seen in people before and after the girl described:
I had a friend in college, who, if I agreed to do early breakfast the next morning, would not leave it to me to get up and meet in time. She would give me an unsolicited wake up call to make sure (but hang up as soon as I picked up).
Yes, it does seem compulsive to me. This reasoning is more convincing to me because she hung up when I picked up, suggesting that she's aware that this was boundary crossing, but went ahead and did it anyway.


It sounds bad but some people are better off being controlled. *hides*
Another one emerges!
Please say more.

[Jennifer]

It sounds bad but some people are better off being controlled. *hides*

*gets out handcuffs*

Hey, get back here, you!

.. you're probably right.
But I realize I do have a few values.
One is that I believe possession of another (i.e., domination) is evil personified.
(Probably because it negates choice and thus negates love.)

[Kora]

I used to think that life was to control others or being controlled. Now... I don't know anymore.

[Hmm]

*gets out handcuffs*

Hey, get back here, you!

:peepwall:


.. you're probably right.
But I realize I do have a few values.
One is that I believe possession of another (i.e., domination) is evil personified.
(Probably because it negates choice and thus negates love.)

On the contrary, you have to trust someone to allow them to possess you. And trust breeds love.

[Anja]

OCD is a myth.
Jamie and Adam proved it.

Oopsie. Must've missed it.

I reverse my stance.:cheese:

[Antisocial one]

Since I am T 90% J 90% with very strong Te I have invited myself into this thread.

What exactly do you want to know?

(I will not run away)

[Anja]

:peepwall:




On the contrary, you have to trust someone to allow them to possess you. And trust breeds love.

Or fear them. . .

[InaF3157]

Since I am T 90% J 90% with very strong Te I have invited myself into this thread.

What exactly do you want to know?

(I will not run away)
Read the thread. The behavior I mean is summarised here:
http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/other-psychology-topics/8838-controlling-people.html#post331008


On the contrary, you have to trust someone to allow them to possess you. And trust breeds love.
:thelook:

[Jennifer]

On the contrary, you have to trust someone to allow them to possess you. And trust breeds love.

No, that is not "possession" as I refer to it.
You cannot "own" another person.
Existentially, the truth is we're all completely separate and solely responsible for our own choices.
(although sometimes we lie to ourselves so as to avoid responsibility for our decisions and/or to avoid the loneliness of being inherently separate)

Even with what you describe, you are still in charge of yourself because you CHOOSE to place yourself in the care of another. That can still be part of "love" -- both in that you trust someone that much AND in that they are willing to care for you.

The sort of possession I describe is when someone dominates someone else who is either naive or unwilling.

[colmena]

Ok.
This kind, which I've seen in people before and after the girl described:


I'd more likely be on the receiving end of that.

[Hmm]

:thelook:

It helps to see the good in people.


No, that is not "possession" as I refer to it.
You cannot "own" another person.
Existentially, the truth is we're all completely separate and solely responsible for our own choices.
(although sometimes we lie to ourselves so as to avoid responsibility for our decisions and/or to avoid the loneliness of being inherently separate)

Even with what you describe, you are still in charge of yourself because you CHOOSE to place yourself in the care of another. That can still be part of "love" -- both in that you trust someone that much AND in that they are willing to care for you.

The sort of possession I describe is when someone dominates someone else who is either naive or unwilling.

Meh. Sounds boring.

[Enjamin]

I don't sit well with people telling me what to do, tends to annoy me and I tend to ignore them....and then manipulate them to do what I want.

[Antisocial one]

Read the thread. The behavior I mean is summarised here:
http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/other-psychology-topics/8838-controlling-people.html#post331008

I was thinking that you are actualy intersted in some deeper details.

I will talk from my own experiance.

This is in short.

It is not lack of self controle at all it is exactly the contrariwise.
You are totally in control over yourself. What means that it is very likely to be ambitious or want to achieve some goal(s).

People usualy are not so (let say TJ) so you will have to push them to achieve the goal.(what is usually in their interest too)

Since I am also strong in N I can see things before they happen.
In that case I need to push things in the direction that looks like the right way.

In some cases people are irresponsible so you will again have to create pressure.

Many times I have seen how Ps organize things and many times they can't stay out of the harms way. Or do the right thing so your intervention is needed.
I know how all of this sounds so egoistic but that is how I see it.

[InaF3157]

It is very egotistical. Being able to foresee and plan, why don't you have contingencies for if they fuck up- control your options? Absent reason (e.g. prior acts) that they will fuck up, why meddle?
In short, where do you get off?

[Hmm]

IF3157, do controlling people try to control you personally?

[InaF3157]

IF3157, do controlling people try to control you personally?

Not usually, but on occasion I butt heads with them. I would not call myself the least controlling person, either, but I respect people's boundaries and space.

[Antisocial one]

It is very egotistical. Being able to foresee and plan, why don't you have contingencies for if they fuck up- control your options? Absent reason (e.g. prior acts) that they will fuck up, why meddle?
In short, where do you get off?

As people in my country say " It is better to prevent then heal"

It is possible that they will fuck up I the way every one will fuck up on the differnt way so you have a mess

Why meddle?

Because you are part of the team so they can damage you or other team members. Also my TJ part is hard to miss so many people are counting that I will be on alert all the time. But this is another story.

It is all about efficacity.

I will presume that you have read "What do you think about me" thread.
One of the main reason why I must be more social is to gain more independence. To get that you need flexibility,what total introversion can't give you. You gain flexibility by having more options and you have more options by having bigger impact on people. What in the end leads to some controling behaviour.

How to command other people in the way that they don't see it as a problem is another thing.

[InaF3157]

Why meddle?

Because you are part of the team so they can damage you or other team members. Also my TJ part is hard to miss so many people are counting that you will be on alert all the time. But this is another story.

It is all about efficacity.
Put yourself in the shoes of the girl I described. There's no team. Imagine that I'm not usually late. Now explain.



I will presume that you have read "What do you think about me" thread..
I haven't, actually. :coffee:


You gain flexibility by having more options and you have more options by having bigger impact on people. What in the end leads to some controling behaviour.

How to comand other people in the way that they don't see it as a problem is another thing.
So people are little toy soldiers without any will of their own to you? Or does it not matter in either case if they do?

[Antisocial one]

Put yourself in the shoes of the girl I described. There's no team. Imagine that I'm not usually late. Now explain.


So people are little toy soldiers without any will of their own to you? Or does it not matter in either case if they do?

You mean on the breakfast case.
I am looking all over the thread and I am not sure on what do you mean.


No, that is the stereotype about people like me which is not true in many cases. Good strategist pays a lot of attention that it is not too bossy and they value opinion of other people.

[Antisocial one]

If you are talking about the phone thing that is stupid move from her side.

But to tell you the truth I need wider context to give you my opinion.

[Eric B]

A natural proclivity to control might be tied to extraversion, and especially pragmatism (Keirsey's temperament facet). After all, in both cases you are approaching another person and bearing influence. Also, role-directing and structure focus will also seem controlling, but both are more reactive.

This would be illustrated in one of Horney's Coping Strategies:

Moving Against:
The individual threatens those perceived as a threat to avoid getting hurt.

"Moving Towards" would be more of extraversion, and this can be in either a friendly or unfriendly stance.

So E-TJ's will tend to be controlling, and I-TJ's will, but in a more passive way. Other T's or J's will also have some controlling traits. "Controlling" can also be manipulation to meet some need, who otherwise would not control others.

To make sure, I had started the NF discussion on whether that group has "control" issues, and sure enough; they said they generally don't, though they can react when values are violated. Makes me still wonder how people like Hitler seem to end up being classed as NF, though. He generally is the epitome of "controlling", and of the classic "Choleric" temperament. (People seem to see him as operating off of a value system, but I don't think that was his preferred judgment).

[Antisocial one]

IF3157 tell me one thing. Was that breakfast important because of something or it was just a breakfast?

[InaF3157]

Ooh, sorry. missed all this.
It was just a breakfast. Nothing important. That was just one example of her controlling antics.

Eric, now that I think about it in MBTI terms, she does fit ENTJ a lot.

[Antisocial one]

Ooh, sorry. missed all this.
It was just a breakfast. Nothing important. That was just one example of her controlling antics.

Eric, now that I think about it in MBTI terms, she does fit ENTJ a lot.

Try with ENTJ.

[Grayscale]

i dont want you to make threads like this in the future... got that?

[InaF3157]

Try with ENTJ.
Perhaps

i dont want you to make threads like this in the future... got that?

:sorry:

[Grayscale]

:sorry:

i was being ironic!

damnit, now i feel bad :sad:

[Jack Flak]

I'm 100% certain she knew that. Mhehe.

[Kaizer]

*gets out handcuffs*

Hey, get back here, you!





:peepwall:




.. you're probably right.
But I realize I do have a few values.
One is that I believe possession of another (i.e., domination) is evil personified.
(Probably because it negates choice and thus negates love.)



On the contrary, you have to trust someone to allow them to possess you. And trust breeds love.

No, that is not "possession" as I refer to it.
You cannot "own" another person.
Existentially, the truth is we're all completely separate and solely responsible for our own choices.
(although sometimes we lie to ourselves so as to avoid responsibility for our decisions and/or to avoid the loneliness of being inherently separate)

Even with what you describe, you are still in charge of yourself because you CHOOSE to place yourself in the care of another. That can still be part of "love" -- both in that you trust someone that much AND in that they are willing to care for you.

The sort of possession I describe is when someone dominates someone else who is either naive or unwilling.





Meh. Sounds boring.

SJ v/s NT ? :coffee: :popc1:

[Hmm]

SJ v/s NT ? :coffee: :popc1:

I dunno about that. :huh:

[Bella]

I have one very controling family member (mostly so with her children) and her parents were very controling. It seems like if you weren't allowed to control the day to day things that are age-apropriate as you grow up you try to make up for it in adulthood by controlling those closest to you. She also never had a career or hobbies to speak of so there were only children to fuss over. Fussing is a complete understatement here.

[Viv]

Based on personal experiences with having dealt with overbearingly controlling ppl in my life, I would say it's a cover-up for deep deep rooted-insecurities based on self-perpetuated feelings of unhappiness/unworthiness. That's just what I get from them.

I have an ESTJ uncle who won't get off his high-horse. The thought of him irks me. He gets so preachy & controlling that reminds me of a *so-called* 'fair/balanced' news analyst who I absolutely CANNOT stand. I just wonder how he ceases to live with himself day-in/day-out. So tempted to send him a variety package of Preparation-H signed by anonymous for X-mas. The man needs a chill pill..

[ZiL]

If I sense that someone is trying to order me around or control me, it seems like I automatically will not do, or will do whatever half-ass, even if what they want me to do is what I really want to do too.

True that. It's like, I'm glad you just ensured that whatever you wanted will certainly not happen now.

[colmena]

My deviance tends to go up a notch. Even if I wanted to do something, or planned to do something, if someone else tells me to do it, I'll suddenly really not want to do it.

[bluemonday]

My deviance tends to go up a notch. Even if I wanted to do something, or planned to do something, if someone else tells me to do it, I'll suddenly really not want to do it.

isn't everyone like that? who, with half a mind, wants to be told what to do ?

this is where Js are way out of order, in my experience. they have a double standard. they don't want to be told what to do, but they won't extend the same courtesy to others.

Ps tend to treat people as they would want to be treated (aka The Golden Rule).

unless their lives are in immediate danger, there is never an altruistic reason to attempt to control another person.

arguing this with a J is an exercise in futility :BangHead: their thinking is too rigid to accommodate it.

[01011010]

I think some people want to control other people in order to keep their life nice and organized. That's probably the case with me and has nothing to do with anything else. I can't answer for anyone else.

[Lauren Ashley]

I think some people want to control other people in order to keep their life nice and organized. That's probably the case with me and has nothing to do with anything else. I can't answer for anyone else.

Ditto. I can't have others messing up my well organized plans :)