Blog of Sara Jakša

BDSM Test Results

Well, I have recently done a BDSM test. How did I come in this situation? Because lets us admit, having an asexual taking a test that was clearly aimed at the sexual kinks is a bit unusual. Not that BDSM is sexual only, but the questions certainly implied this.

Not that I am not familiar with the concepts at least implicitly. While fanfiction are not the best examples of the well written stories, the BDSM kink is used in them quite a lot. And most writers at least do a quick google search, if they are not more familiar with it.

So I am aware of quite a couple of these kinks. Of the top and bottoms. Of the submissive and dominants and switches. Of the whole age related games, from kid to daddy kinks, to the bounding and so on. I am not sure if the fanfiction writers get their ideas from the community, or they just write what is interesting to them. But there is overlap.

You can find my results on

So let us discuss my results. The Switch part is apparently the strongest part of my personality. These are the people that can be in both the dominant and the submissive role. Which is not that surprising to me. I mean, when I am in some social situations, I would prefer if somebody else would just make all decisions and I would just go along without thinking. The Toastmasters hill climbing were a pretty good example of that, if not for some of them then suddenly trying to make everything equal.

For the record, I actually think that the decision making, where everybody has the same say is one of the most inefficient way of making the decisions. Because either the people vote, and nobody is satisfied, or things are done by consensus, which takes too fucking long.

Well, as you cam probably imagine, when I am too frustrated with the current situation, then I take charge. Which is when I do hope that nobody stands in my way. I guess my 'super hard' (they were not that hard) table topics were also a good example of this. I liked making people do things that they did were not sure they wanted to do, because I knew it will help them in the future.

I guess the Switch part does kind of makes sense. In the light of that, what does not make that much sense in my high score in Vanilla. Though, because it was such a sexually oriented test, I guess it makes sense. I don't have any interest in quite a lot of kinks. I mean, there are multiple kinks, where I have very low interest in both sides: like sadist/masochists, degradation, owner/pet, bondage, any kind of age play and master/slave.

It is also interesting that there are a mixture of roles through the whole spectrum. Though the spider diagrams, if I read them correctly, show that I am more strongly leaning into the dominant kind of role. But not that much. I have both dominant roles toward the top, like hunter and dominant, and the submissive roles, like brat and submissive.

As I mentioned before, I got interested in the concept, because I don't think that consensus is the best way to reach decisions, so I figured that some of these concepts would be helpful. I had all these plans of what kind of things I could try, if I could just figure out my tendency. Because I seems to be on the both part of the spectrum.

On the one hand, all my plans got ruined, and now I am not sure how to use this information. On the other hand, I guess I should just accept this. I mean, I can be like all these annoying ambiverts. Sometimes I am like this, but then I am the opposite. Now I guess I can say that about these roles and be just as annoying. :)

Now I should go and find out, if there is a way I could leverage this to improve my communications skills.

Emotions and the Temperament

I have recently went over the pdf of the lecture about Affective computing. And there I have found an interesting connection between the emotions and temperaments. So I was thinking that I would like to describe the connection here, just in case anybody else, like you the reader or my future self, you like to know about it as well.

The emotions were grouped in the coordinate system like this:

negative valence positive valence
high arousal Angry Happy
low arousal Sad Apathetic

The emotions can be either grouped by whenever they are positive or negative, or whenever they have high or low energy.

The can then be put in the exact configuration by using the Galen's theory of the forth humors:

Dry (Earth) Wet (Water)
hot (Fire) Choleric Sanguine
cold (Air) Melancholy Phlegmatic

Sure, I could argue about some of these distinctions, but I think that is a very good way of grouping people. I mean, when I think about myself, I usually test as either melancholic or phlegmatic, rarely as choleric and never as sanguine. But looking at the emotions, while I am sometimes apathetic and angry, most people would never describe be as happy. They would mostly describe me as sad, if they had to use one of the four words. Though I do know people, that could be described be either of these four.

It is also interesting, because the elements also give a picture of what the person is like. So, based on the elements, I imagine the phlegmatic people like the cold lake in the mountains. I imagine the sanguine people as the hot spring, or maybe a summer rain. I do prefer the hot spring. The Choleric are like the fire raging over the dry forests, you know the kind that no longer have much greenery, because it is so dry. And the melancholy is like the stony mountains, simply standing there.

Testosterone Role in Developing Different Personalities

Recently I have come across the idea that the difference in women being interested in people and men being interested in things might be both the results of the personality, and not gender and it might be the result of the testosterone level in pregnancy.

So far, I have not read the article, that deals with the personality part of it, but I have read one or two that dealt with the hormone part of it. While it would apparently me unethical to test this in humans experimentally, there were still some studies done.

It helps that ethical guidelines for animal research are a bit more lax than for human research as well. Apparently, if one treats a female animal with testosterone, then it develops a more male-like behavior. I imagine that this means, that this animal gets more aggressive and competitive. I mean I am assuming this, because I imagine that at least some gender differences has to come from gender differences in agreeableness. But I might be wrong. Also, it is a stereotypical behavior for each gender, right or wrong.

Well, it was not just females that were tested, but also males. If male animals, when they were very young, got their testicles removed, then their behavior becomes a lot more female-like. So we could use this to create cooperative bulls, and attaching cows. And there would not even me a mad cow disease involved. I know, it is not rabies, so it is not likely that infected beings would suddenly start attacking anybody.

But there have been some studies also done on humans. They have shown to affect the gender-related play and gender identity. For example, an experiment compared the children with classic congenital adrenal hyperplasia to their relatives. They took both groups and tried to teach them, either by modeling or explicitly about the unrelated gender connection. For example trying to teach them that silver is a girl's color. Then they watched what toys they played with and asked them which toys did they prefer. In a group of girls, the ones with classic congenital adrenal hyperplasia, meaning ones with more testosterone exposure during pregnancy, were less likely to adhere to the gender roles than girls without thins condition.

Also, men with complete androgen insensitivity syndrome, show reduced wish to engage in male-play, and they are also much more likely to identify as females. For people familiar with House MD, this syndrome was presented in the episode Skin Deep. If you are not familiar, than I will not spoil it too much, as I was recently informed that most people hate that. But I think I can say, that it is a syndrome, where cells are 'immune' to the male sex hormones.

On the other hand, the level of male sex hormones, which can also be called androgen, can affect the gender identification in women, where women have a less strong women identity and are more likely to identify as man as well. The same is true for males. Lower levels of androgen cause more female-like identification.

I have also head that testosterone is connected with aggression between ages of 16 and 25 years old. And that the creativity curve is the same as the aggression curve. If I remember correctly, it might be only talking abut men.

Now I am a bit interested, if the testosterone also affect the personality in the specific way, shown through any of the model. But so far I have not read about this yet.

The Big Five and Romantic Partnership

The idea that I have heard about the personality (according to the Big Five) and romantic partner is that the best combination are two similar people, but not the same. That the differences in personality are at the same time the part that lets people grow and the part that bring problems in the relationship.

For example, the difference in extroversion can bring forth the problem of how many things will they do together and how social will the things they do together be. Because the introvert would rather be in a small group or one-on-one or even have some time alone for themselves. But the extrovert would most likely prefer going out all the time and meeting zillions other people.

The difference in agreeableness could be show in the difference of how much do people adapt to other people. The agreeable people let other people make up their mind about most if not all things. And they have a way to finish the discussion with the words: "whatever you want". On the other hand, the disagreeable people are much more likely to make their own mind, and if or when they do, they will tell it. So they will find the "whenever you want" approach annoying.

The difference between conscientiousness would be shown in the similar matter to the workaholics vs. relaxed person. The workaholic would be the one always working and then complained that the other person never does anything. On the other hand, the person on the other side of the spectrum would complain that they can never relax and it is always work, work, work, and for the change they should just let it go and do something fun.

The difference between the neuroticism could be shown for example in the financial dealing. The person with the higher neuroticism would most likely wanted to have savings, while the person with low neuroticism would not. Or how much to check something before leaving or what they are actually willing to do and so on. Now that I think about, the person with high neuroticism would want savings, but a person with high consciousnesses is much more likely to actually create it.

And the last, the difference in openness could be shown in what could be discussed. And also in how many new things the people would try. So one low on openness could consider the person high on openness crazy and unreasonable, as they would always want to do something new, change something or have a non-conventional idea and wanted to discuss it. On the other side, high openness people might see low openness people as boring, bland and too conventional.

Well, if I would be more of romantic or high on agreeableness, I the ending would have more emphasis on the partner, but I am neither, so this two questions are the good ending for me. Ask yourself: which difference would you be most willing to live with? And which part of yourself do you want to change?

Goals of the Big Five Personality Traits

Each Big Five trait has their own goal that they are trying to achieve. The higher a person is in a trait, more strongly is the goal represented in one's psyche. So these goals can be strongly or weakly represented in each person, and the personality type is the one that decides based on which one will people act and what will bring them motivation.

The goal of the extroversion is social success. The extroversion needs people and it needs engagement with other people. That is why extroversion sees other people as opportunities and why they are much more happy when surrounded by other people then when they are alone. In the numbers it is strength, could also be their moto, I guess.

The goal of neuroticism is security and safety. They need a strong function, that they can be sure will not break down. They needs a safe place, maybe also a safe space. They need to be protected from any kind of threat or danger.

The goal of agreeableness is to have strong, deep, intimate relationships. People that are strong in this trait see their life through the story of the relationships that they had with other people. They need to feel part of the community and they need to feel like that have a strong relationships with other people.

The goal of consciousnesses is efficiency, results and duty. They are the people that feel bad, if they are not doing something that they would consider productive. They need work, or they will wither.

And the goal of openness is playing with ideas, creativity and beauty. They are the ones that want to be creative all the time and they want to talk about ideas all the time.

So this can give some indication in to how to orient one's life, though I am sure that most people that listen to themselves already do this. I am high on openness and low on agreeableness and extroversion. And I had noticed this before, so my life is more oriented in a way, where I can deal with ideas a lot of times, and I don't needs to spend a lot of time in a chit-chat with other people. Low agreeableness might also explain, why I did not put a lot of effort into finding a boyfriend. Or a girlfriend, as I don't know why I should care about the gender, when I know I am not going to have sex with them.

Some other people would orient it differently. It is based on personality, so any combination of them will do. As long as it is something you are.

How MBTI Types Deal with the World

There are different way of how different MBTI types deal with the world. Here is just a short table in how they do it:

Type First Function Second Function
INTP create a model of a problem (Ti) come up with multiple solution to it (Ne)
ISTP create a model of a problem (Ti) come up with the solution based on current situation (Se)
INFP check what do the values tell you (Fi) come up with multiple ideas of how to bring them true (Ne)
ISFP check what do the values tell you (Fi) come up with idea based on current situation (Se)
ENTP create multiple ideas of what to do (Ne) evaluate them based on logical principles (Ti)
ENFP create multiple ideas of what to do (Ne) evaluate them based on moral principles (Fi)
ESTP see the current situation for what it is (Se) come up with the logical way to resolve it (Ti)
ESFP see the current situation for what it is (Se) come up with the moral based way to resolve it (Fi)
INTJ create a future vision to achieve (Ni) change the environment so it will come true (Te)
INFJ create a future vision to achieve (Ni) bring people together so it will become true (Fe)
ISTJ check how things were done in the past (Si) change the environment so it will come true (Te)
ISFJ check how things were done in the past (Si) bring people together so it will become true (Fe)
ENTJ create the efficient environment (Te) in accordance to the inner vision (Ni)
ESTJ create the efficient environment (Te) in accordance to the past reflections/memories (Si)
ENFJ bring harmony to the group (Fe) based on the inner vision (Ni)
ESFJ bring harmony to the group (Fe) based on the past reflections/memories (Si)

This is just a short summary, which was supposed to show the importance that the first function has in the type and how the second function supports this function. It is a crude summary, but it is something that I refer to quite often (recreating the descriptions in my head each time), so I posted here in a hope that it would be useful for somebody else as well.

How to Find Another Person's MBTI Type: The Word Description of Functions (Bebee)

One method, that I have come across in the recent months is to simply use the word descriptions fo the function. You can find the chapter of the book, where I had found it here. It was an effort by Bebee to simplify the definition of the Jungian personality function, so they are much more easier to explain to the other person. Here are the description below:

Function Type Persona Ego Self
Fi ixFP judging appraising establishing value
Ti ixTP naming defining understanding
Ni iNxJ imagining knowing divining
Si iSxJ implementing verifying accounting
Fe exFJ validating affirming relating
Te exTJ regulating planning enforcing
Ne eNxP entertaining envisioning enabling
Se eSxP engaging experiencing enjoying

So, the function goes from the persona level, through the ego and ends up with the self, which is the ultimate goal of each function. I can see thing in my own functions. For example, my Ti would a lot of time try to make sure that there are right words for each of the concepts that I am using. It is a part that I worry about when I interact with other people, as I want to make sure the right words are used and mistakes really bother me. When I am not sure about the naming of something, that I try to define it for myself. But the ultimate goal is to be able to understand the certain phenomena or situation. And while a lot of times this process is verbal, it is not always.

My Ne would also be a good example, but I would rather give an example of a Ne use from an ENFP that I know. When she hears a new idea, for example for a new business, she entertains the though, she then envisions how it will look like that then quickly jumps to enabling. My process is a lot slower, as I need a lot more time to jump from one to another. But we both go through these phases.

How to account for the other function, since I am not that strong in the them, but I can imagine that the same principle apply to them. It starts with the first step and then continues to the last one. I would be interested in actually confirming this with the phenomenological research, but I am not sure I would be able to find enough people to participate, since I would need at least 2-3 for each function.

So for now, it is only something interesting that helps me quickly decide the person's type. Which still makes it quite useful.

Difference between Fi and Fe Functions

As somebody that I don't think I use a lot of either Fi nor Fe function, I can only try to find the differences, based on my theoretical knowledge. I hope this will still be useful, even though I will not be able to draw a lot from the personal experience.

That I don't know a lot can also be seen in my typings. This is the one that a lot of times trips me, and I can not really differentiate between them.

The difference between this two function is that one is oriented inside and the other is oriented outside. So Fe, which is oriented outside, is the one that is in charge in interacting with the outside world. So it is much more likely to have a culturally accepted emotions, much more likely to express the emotions on the outside, especially when they are appropriate emotions and it is expected to show them. This is the function that makes us sad at the funerals and laugh at jokes and lie what we think about each others appearances. I don't really understand the utility of the last one, but as far as I could tell, it is part of the social contract. I really wish I could have read it somewhere.

Fi is much more inside oriented. So these people are much more attuned to their individual feelings, and because of that, they are more likely to not freely show it to everybody that comes around. A lot of time I can see Fi being connected with the strongly felt belief, that something needs to be done for the people or for the world. I am sometimes suspicious that the notion to save the world came from these people, even though it is normally connected with the NF temperament. There are also a lot of shoulds involved. Like people should protect the planet, people should stop eating meat, or people should follow their passions.

Because of this difference, Fe is much more oriented with the general harmony among people. Because of that, since strong feelings are usually not good for total harmony, their feelings are a bit more shallow than the feelings of the Fi types. Fi types on the other hand, feel strongly about their values, and are much more likely to appreciate the individuality of each person by themselves.

But this is where my knowledge about the differences stops.

Difference between Ti and Te Functions

I wish to say, that considering that I am using Ti the most, I would be more insightful in the difference between the Ti and Te. But I don't think I am. But I do now a person, who is a very strong Te user, so I might be able to still discern some differences between the Ti and Te function.

The Ti function is about the problem solving. It is the logical, A follows B follows B type of reasoning, or at least it is in its pure form. The other functions make this a bit more complicated. On the other hand, the Te, at least from my perception, is more a function of how to do something in a efficient way, making sure things work smoothly.

This is where the differences between these two functions came into play. The first is, that there is a difference between speed and accuracy. This could be clearly seen when I thought this other person a computer program. I wanted to go through it in detail, making sure that everything is clear and it would be able to be repeated. But instead, I ended up giving a short course, that was recorded. So anybody could go back to there, if anything was unclear.

While my Ti wanted to make sure that everything is thought in an accurate and exact way, Te seems to have preferred a solution that worked and will produce the smallest amount of problems with least effort. Which makes me wonder about a couple of things. A lot of time, after the conversation would have already passed, I would still be thinking that I did not express myself well enough and that I might have used the word in a wrong way. Two recent examples are the word understand (which has way to many different shades of meaning) and when talking about intelligence. Now that I am contracting this, maybe the Te types are alright with the approximation.

The second difference, which I don't know how much can I attribute the this functions only, but it still happened, was that I was the one trying new ideas, and she was the one trying to keep the system running in an efficient way. She once told me, that just as she creates the system, and makes sure it is stable, we come along and break it. And it is frustrating for her.

Well, for me, having a new situation is like having a new puzzle, so it is a bit more fun. As long as I don't need to depends on people, of course.

There was also a difference that I read about, but I am not 100% sure about it. The people with Ti were supposed to be more skeptical, while the people with Te are supposed to be more confident. Well, I am skeptical and I think Ti on average is quite a skeptical function. But while it would make logical sense for Te to be less skeptical and more confident, I have to admit that I don't think that I have noticed this so far. Maybe I just did not look at the people well enough yet.

These are the differences that I noticed and remembered while writing this blog. But, as for the two blog post before, I will continue to refine this knowledge.

Difference between Se and Si Functions

I still don't completely understand the difference between the Se and Si function, or at least I don't understand it on a sort of instinctive level. But I have been observing things and I have read about it, so this is sort of consolidation of my current knowledge, as much as I will be able to remember in the span of writing this blog.

There are a couple of difference between Si and Se. I am more of a Si user (my third function) and that means that I can at least recognize it in myself. I usually don't use Si be itself, but a lot of time it provides the input to my Ne function. In these cases I experience it as ideas, that I could connect with the certain memory. Maybe I remember hearing relevant stuff at the lecture, or maybe I remember how things were done somewhere else. A lot of my ideas were simply transporting a concept that I have noticed previously in the new situation.

On the other hand, Se was supposed to be experiencing the current situation with the five sense. I can try and contrast this with the Ti function. When there was a car crash one, I remember going from one point to another. Alright, she is laying there. I need to get he away from the street. Is there a car there? No, I can go there,... But an ESTP that I know says that when something like that happens, you simply act and there is no verbal argumentation and thinking what is should be done involved. You just react. Somehow. Don't ask me how this is possible, because I have no idea, but that is what she had told me. But it does sound a lot different than what I described above.

There are also a couple of differences that I have discovered with my theoretical research. One of them is the time. Si-types are much more likely to be thinking about the past, and the Se-types are much more likely to be thinking about the present. Based on this time dimension, the Si-types are much more likely to enjoy the status quo, while the Se types are much more likely to try something new and not be that possessive of the current status quo.

The second difference that my theoretical research uncovered was the difference between sensory experience and minimalism. The Si-types are much more likely to be minimalistic and have a bland tastes. So they are alright to eat the same food everyday (at least based on the experience in my family), they are more likely to live in a sort of minimalism and they are more likely to not care about the material possessions that much. They are also more likely to be alright with what they have.

The Se-types, on the other hand, are much more likely to appreciate the sensory experiences. The good food, the new adventure, the travels, the material wealth and so on. That is why they are much more likely to be quite excessive in this, like buying a good car or television on a whim or going out to eat or spending a lot of time preparing good meals and so on.

And this is my current knowledge, but I will certainly be building on it as I go along.