#not appealing

The ref

I’d still eat some desert thing if I was at some fancy restaurant. But it’d have to be worth it. Other deserts are inferior and a waste of time..

One thought that came to me regarding mbti meta, identity/orientation, and typing evidence is that a lot of self-discussion is taken as evidence of high Fi or a 4 fix/core without a lot of nuanced thought when it comes to context. On tumblr you see people typed as high Fi/4 a lot for talking about themselves and in real life I at least have seen a good bit of discussion over sexual orientation or gender identity as similar evidence, but I think both of those ignore the important facts that-  a. Typology is inherently self referential and actively necessitates some self discussion that would seem indulgent and annoying in an unhealthy Fi/4 way if it were just in public unprompted, but like... that’s not the case, and b. We’re in a time of cultural unrest and massive scale discussion about sexual orientation and identities within the categories of race, gender, orientation, age group, etc. and what it means to be an individual within that group. Sharing your own experience, especially as someone who doesn’t conform to what’s socially rewarded, is kind of necessary. I would argue that even discussing what it’s like to be a white straight male in today’s climate, be the discussion counterproductive and narrow minded or productive and complex, isn’t evidence of Fi or 4 because it’s still a discussion of identity boxes- an external system that you fit inside of rather than true internal uniqueness and/or authenticity. This isn’t to say that these boxes are fake, they’re very real, but they are a system that prompts self exploration and discussion, and therefor any discussion thereof is not entirely self-motivated and therefor not necessarily evidence of Fi/4. Of course Fi users/4s are unlikely to shy away from such discussions as they are centered around issues very important to Fi/4, but I think that you need to be careful when considering those discussions when it comes to type and consider content and style meticulously before making conclusions on the very act of self-discussion. First off because it often pigeonholes and generalizes an already marginalized group (mostly LGBTQIA+), second off because it’s just a very reductive view of the situation and that’s coming from a dominant Te user, and third off because there is a chance that Fi/4 will actively reject “external and objective” markers or categories of identities.

At least he was honest?

And thanks to whoever told me to smell her feet, I am now aware they do indeed smell like cornchips and this disturbs me very greatly.