Typing Interview Transcript on Friendship, Boundaries, and Self-Perception

Interviewer: Look, when you meet someone for the first time, does your mental image of them usually match reality right away, or does it take some time to "click into place" later on?

Speaker: Well, more often than not, it’s clear right away what kind of person they generally are.

Interviewer: Got it. Then I'm curious about the girls: when you met up, what were your first impressions? How well did they match what you had pictured from your correspondence?

Speaker: Overall, they matched by about ninety percent. One of them I had already pictured as very calm and soothing. The second one, on the contrary, seemed more hyper, but not all the time—more like in specific moments.

Interviewer: And what kind of people do you feel most comfortable with yourself? Not in terms of who you like more, but specifically who is psychologically easier for you to be around?

Speaker: Probably different kinds. I feel comfortable with both, but they feel different. For instance, one is very calm, the other is more fun and lively. With the lively one, it’s like I fire up too.

Interviewer: So you tend to adapt to the overall emotional vibe?

Speaker: Yeah, probably. By nature, I’m a pretty quiet person. I can stay silent for hours and just peacefully go about my business. But if there are emotional people around, I start turning on too, feeding off their energy. On the other hand, if someone in a group is too tense and closed off, while someone else is too intense, I want to balance it out somehow, gently liven things up.

Interviewer: So you don’t like an imbalance?

Speaker: Yeah, that’s more like it. I feel comfortable when there’s some kind of equilibrium. Like this morning, for example, I was having coffee with that very calm girl, and we had such a cozy, peaceful conversation. She doesn’t care for loud, intense emotions, and I become calmer around her too. I actually like that.

Interviewer: So, it turns out you’re usually drawn to either very calm or very emotional people?

Speaker: Yes, exactly. The middle ground is rarer. And I’m sort of in the middle myself: I can be both calm and emotional. And I guess that’s why either very emotional or very calm people are drawn to me.

Interviewer: So you’re like a balance between them?

Speaker: Yes, exactly.

Interviewer: What about guys? Is it the same way or different?

Speaker: Completely different. I also have two guy friends: one is calm, the other is hyper.

Interviewer: Which one was easier to connect with?

Speaker: Connecting went a bit smoother with the hyper one. Though honestly, they both took the initiative to get closer, but with him, everything just happened faster and easier—just chatting about random stuff, small talk, and the connection just builds itself.

Interviewer: And with the calm one?

Speaker: With him, it also started with online communication. At first, we’d talk maybe once every two weeks, mostly about the game, since we’re all text-RPers [roleplayers]. We’d discuss certain plot points, and everything went pretty quietly.

Interviewer: So there wasn’t much initiative on your part initially?

Speaker: Not really.

Interviewer: And what changed after that?

Speaker: We really connected because he made a graphic gift for me—an image. I thanked him and started describing the associations I had with it, how I pictured it.

Interviewer: What kind of picture was it?

Speaker: It was a girl in a car, leaning back in her seat, all in these sandy, golden tones. And I immediately got this image in my head: like she’s driving down a deserted road, nothing around, heat, a scorching sun, with a little house or a shed standing somewhere off in the distance. I described that to him.

Interviewer: And he caught onto it?

Speaker: Yes. He immediately caught onto the idea and started building on it. And literally within a couple of phrases, we decided: let’s do an alternate universe game.

Interviewer: Meaning without any pre-planned plot?

Speaker: Yeah, completely without a plan. That was unusual for me, because I typically prefer having at least a rough framework: like, this goes here, that goes there, this is roughly where we’re heading. But here, we just decided to write on the fly: you write whatever you see, and the other person picks it up.

Interviewer: And how did it turn out?

Speaker: Really interesting. We had this feeling like we were actually reading each other's minds. He’d write, “I was just about to say that.” Or I’d think, “That’s exactly what I have in my head right now,” and he’d already be phrasing it.

Interviewer: Did the game end up being successful?

Speaker: Yes, very much so. It was later praised on the forum as one of the best. We were especially pleased since it was our first time trying something like that. Now we even have two more parts ahead of us.

Interviewer: How do you generally view a romantic angle in communication? Do you tend to shut it down, not letting it develop?

Speaker: What do you mean by "romantic angle"?

Interviewer: Well, when the interaction emphasizes not just friendship and shared activities, but feelings and a special attitude toward the person.

Speaker: I see. No, I wouldn’t say I shut it down completely. I just don’t give it any special priority.

Interviewer: Why?

Speaker: Because for me, friendship is the most important thing in any relationship. I can communicate in a businesslike or romantic way, but if there’s no sense of comradeship, it’s hard for me.

Interviewer: So a friendly foundation is vital to you?

Speaker: Yes, very much so. For me, that’s a fundamental thing.

Interviewer: And how are you usually in communication—strict, soft, distant?

Speaker: I don’t know, I wouldn’t say I’m strictly strict. Though many people think so. Some people are even a bit intimidated by me.

Interviewer: Why do you think that is?

Speaker: Probably because of my way of speaking. I like a formal style, professional speech. Especially with serious topics. People apparently misread that as coldness or harshness.

Interviewer: But you don’t feel that way about yourself?

Speaker: No. I actually consider myself a soft person. But many people say I misjudge myself.

Interviewer: Have there been cases where people were afraid to approach you?

Speaker: Yes, that happens in real life too. I've been told that at first, people were even scared to talk to me, but later it turned out I’m quite positive and have no intention of "eating" anyone. I sometimes joke myself that I'm "just not very tasty."

Interviewer: Have you had romantic relationships?

Speaker: I have, but unsuccessfully, let's put it that way.

Interviewer: What does "unsuccessfully" mean to you?

Speaker: Well, they essentially didn't work out or come together properly. Nothing stable ever came of it.

Interviewer: Why do you think that is?

Speaker: First of all, we were too young back then. Everything was driven by emotion. Though my emotions were more on the inside—I don’t like showing them in front of outsiders.

Interviewer: And on his end?

Speaker: On his end, everything was very out in the open, too performative. And that scared me. We just didn’t understand each other.

Interviewer: It was specifically his openness that scared you?

Speaker: Yes. And there was also a rather strong pressure from his side. Plus, there were other interested people involved, so the situation became tense very quickly. Back then, I felt like I was being pulled into a relationship too abruptly, and I wasn't ready for it.

Interviewer: So it was the intensity and the pace that stressed you out?

Speaker: Yes. I kept thinking, "Good God, what do they even want from me? We're just talking."

Interviewer: But did something ever click inside you?

Speaker: Yes, absolutely. It clicked big time at first sight back then. But it was my first relationship, and it scared me a lot because I wasn't used to that kind of feeling.

Interviewer: Were subsequent relationships different?

Speaker: Yes, they developed and are developing calmly, without any rush.

Interviewer: So, it seems you draw a line: if someone starts putting too much pressure on you, it doesn't work for you?

Speaker: Yes, exactly. If someone pushes too hard, we’ll most likely part ways. People seem to accept and understand that.

Interviewer: So it’s important to you that distance and freedom are maintained in communication?

Speaker: Yes. And it’s also important to me that a person isn’t just a "boyfriend," but first and foremost a friend. A like-minded comrade, if you will.

Interviewer: That's a good phrase. So you don’t just need romance, but a common ground of interests and views?

Speaker: Yes. I’m just not interested if a person doesn’t captivate me as an individual.

Interviewer: And do your guy friends captivate you?

Speaker: Yes, of course. They’re interesting. But maybe they’re a little afraid of me, so they don’t always show their true selves right away.

Interviewer: You scare them?

Speaker: Apparently, yes. Though I don’t feel it myself. It seems to me that I am quite soft.

Interviewer: But why then, in your experience, do people often hesitate to approach you?

Speaker: I don’t know. Maybe I look too serious. Or maybe it’s just my way of speaking, so people expect pressure from me even when I’m not applying any.

Interviewer: So, does it turn out that you're sometimes afraid of confusing an interest in someone's personality with romantic interest?

Speaker: When I find someone interesting as a person, I start getting wrapped up in them. I think about them a lot, analyze them a lot, and after that, it's hard to tell: is this just an interest in the person, or is it already something more?

Interviewer: So you need time to differentiate between these states?

Speaker: Yes, of course.

Interviewer: What if you compare it to your first love?

Speaker: First love was, of course, very bright and sincere, absolutely. But I understand that all relationships are different and important in their own way.

Interviewer: How important is it for you that communication happens in person, rather than just online?

Speaker: Very important. Online, it’s still harder to understand what you’re actually feeling. It’s a completely different format.

Interviewer: Have there been cases where everything went great online, but not in reality?

Speaker: Yes, there have been. We could talk perfectly online, but when we met, it turned out that in person, it felt like there was nothing to talk about.

Interviewer: And how do you explain that?

Speaker: I don’t know. Maybe in reality, everything is perceived differently. Maybe people get flustered. Maybe I behave the wrong way too.

Interviewer: Maybe they just need time to get used to it?

Speaker: Perhaps. But if the two of us are sitting there in silence, I still usually try to find a topic for conversation. Though I wouldn't say I'm very good at starting topics—I usually need someone to throw a certain direction my way.

Interviewer: So it's easier for you to keep a conversation going than to start it?

Speaker: Yes, exactly.

Interviewer: How do you handle debates or arguments?

Speaker: I don’t really like arguing because people often view a debate as a confrontation.

Interviewer: And how do you view it?

Speaker: As a discussion. As an opportunity to compare arguments. I don’t have a goal to "crush" the person or push my point of view.

Interviewer: But even so, can you still defend your position for a long time?

Speaker: Yes, if I think it’s important. But to many, it feels like I'm being pushy.

Interviewer: Why is that?

Speaker: I don’t know. Sometimes people feel pressure even when I haven't done anything yet. They just tense up in advance.

Interviewer: Is that noticeable in your everyday life too?

Speaker: Yes. Even my family says that shop assistants seem afraid to approach me in stores. And I’m just standing there looking around, not doing anything special.

Interviewer: And how do you feel about yourself?

Speaker: I consider myself a soft person. But apparently, that’s not always visible from the outside.

Interviewer: Is that why you got interested in Socionics?

Speaker: Yes, primarily to understand myself better.

Interviewer: How long have you been familiar with it?

Speaker: I first came across it about six or seven years ago.

Interviewer: And what caught your attention back then?

Speaker: Someone dropped a test into a roleplaying game. I took it, got the LSI type, and read the description. Back then I thought, "No way, this is completely not about me."

Interviewer: Did anyone ever tell you that you were exactly that type?

Speaker: Yes, one girl said she immediately thought I was a LSI. But I didn’t accept it at the time.

Interviewer: But you started reading more about it later anyway?

Speaker: Yes. Later I accidentally stumbled upon more detailed descriptions, including male and female type descriptions. At first, I used it as a baseline for character profiles, because there were interesting observations to rely on when building an image.

Interviewer: So you didn’t take it as a rigid system?

Speaker: No, not as a rigid one. More like material for reflection. I take individual points from it, but I don’t follow it blindly.

Interviewer: And are people in your social circle interested in it now too?

Speaker: Yes, many are interested. When I want to show someone a character concept, I say, "It’s going to be roughly like this type." And people get what I mean.

Interviewer: But do you get the feeling that this whole typology often remains at the level of guesswork?

Speaker: Of course. There are a million interpretations. We study, compare, verify, but it's hard to do accurately, especially if you don't see the person in real life. After all, the way we write about ourselves doesn't always match who we truly are.

Interviewer: Yes, and that is why I am not going to pretend we have absolute truth here. But there is already enough information for analysis at the level of stable dichotomies.