Reply To: Seelie & Adaptive vs. Unseelie & Directive: Is it Related to Conflict Avoidance?

[Faex]

Hi, @ladynerdsky!

Jumping in as an unseelie Fi-lead. I don’t think it’s conflict avoidance at all, and I think the descriptions and depictions of unseelie Fi as dismissive, haughty, vengeful, somewhat evil or grinch-like are exaggerated.

When I said that, I was deliberately describing a misconception I had had, not an official definition. Notice what I said before then,

Yeah, we’ve always known seelie/unseelie is not about good/bad, but this goes out the window soon as we say it because of the “light/dark” associations I think. Of course Auburn has always clarified that even the light/dark is NOT good/bad, but certain images have strong associations that go beyond CT and Typology so that they are very difficult to transcend once they become biases.
So far, I’d been defining Unseelie as “Sassy, haughty, dismissive, vengeful, filled with bile.” Since you weren’t these, @animal, I thought you had to be “balanced” rather than Unseelie.
Directive was, “Unmerciful”, with unhealthy Directive being “Prone to vengeance and controlling behaviour/power struggles, based on flimsy reasons.”
I’m happy with Aub’s current definitions. So much more neutral!

Essentially, when these were being defined we had big debates about associating these attitudes with Light and Dark on Dischord, due to the risk of pple associating negative qualities with the Dark, and that's what I was talking about here.