Bonding Method; the Survivalist* and the Idealists*

The bonding method describes a person’s approach to new people. The goal, for both types, is to gel with the new group, or a new chosen group or a person. However, the Idealists* do so predominately cautiously and with what they call respect: “I don’t want to step on your toes, but I need space, too… Do you think you could give me some?” (They anger when someone rudely takes too much space.) the Survivalist* do it roughly with disrespect: “Dude, I may be new here, but give me the space I need to be happy!” (They never seem to truly anger. They just pretend to argue.)

When a person is approaching perfection in their relationship skills, the way they got there was that the Idealists* has had a ton and ton of conversations. He or she has learned how other people think. An evolved anarchist knows how to give others space and how to take and protect the space they require with poise and style. An evolved the Survivalist* has been knocked back so many times they know what is expected of them in all circles they’re associating with. When either type faces a new social situation, they retrieve to their own typical mode unless they’ve become skilled enough to alter their approach based on the other person’s bonding method.

Visible for the Idealists* group only:

I am a Idealists* myself, so whatever I say about the Survivalist* is a foreign way for me to think. But what I gather, they, themselves deny or admit to everything, to keep you guessing. No matter what I ask of them “is this the way you think” the answer is a random yes or no, as they don’t want to be figured out, or they want someone to “take the time to figure them out as a sign of love”, but they don’t want to make it easy on you.

They always want to find the answer that is the most annoying one to “the dominant” or “new friend”. They want to be “put into their place”, and “shown how to be”. The idea is that by annoying a new person, they’ll get to know them fastest. What they want, like, disapprove of, etc. They feel that they cannot find true love unless there is a clear ruler in a relationship. To be the boss is to protect. To love is to protect.

This, to a Idealists*, feels really annoying. It’s wasting time when we could be actually getting to know each other and see if there’s anything real between us, right? Often the Survivalist* also feel there’s some golden nugget about them that you haven’t discovered yet that will make ALL THE DIFFERENCE when in reality, you couldn’t give a flying fuck.

the Survivalist* don’t have an ethical code except for one: Don’t leave a friend

An the Idealists* has ideas, opinions, and philosophies, we’ve got an ethical code – the tyrant does not. They live by whatever way is forced down their throat, and a Idealists* is often prone to teach. That makes us catnip to those people. And I have tried to withhold my annoyance, wrath, and loathing of these people for a long time, because to a Idealists*, keeping your feelings in check is respect, however to the Survivalist*, that is “weakness” and “insecurity”. So I guess it’s time to come clean for everyone’s benefit.

To me, everything that is wrong in this world is due to the tyrants. I can say this to the anarchist because you do not have the modality that will destroy a group of people if they are deemed “wrong”. And, also the Survivalist* won’t be able to destroy itself, because they don’t know how to self-identify. They are what they are told to be; if you say “American police force is racist” and they happen to be a police officer, they’ll turn racist because that’s what you said they “must” be. They are FUCKED UP. A black tyrant will turn into a criminal because you told that’s what being black means.

Low IQ the Survivalist* will have trouble with nuances and conditions

They are also not very good with clauses, caution, or nuance, or instructions given to different groups of people separately. Therefore, they tend to drop all words and phrases such as “may, maybe, may be, might, sometimes, some, with caution, that group of people” out of all sentences, as they feel caution is a sign of cowardness, not wisdom or understanding that the truth is complicated. They also believe that everyone who are equal to each other must be treated the same. What they consider “equal” is people who know each other or are technically from the same background. At most, they accept different rules for men and women but is a very clear cut, easy to understand the traditional circumstance.

All at the same time

They can have extreme trouble with everything I teach. This goes up to the point of expecting that people should be able to be polyandrous, polygynous, and polygynandrous at the same time, all the while they are nurturing a monogamous relationship. They try and corporate all ways of existing and all rules into their own personal life simultaneously. They have trouble understanding the idea of “free personal choice” and try to apply the advice from the perspective of “which choice will make us most loved/popular?”

One brain overall in a group

The Survivalist* idea of “peace” is when there is ONE BRAIN that governs over all other minds, wants, wishes, and needs. They are the ultimate dictatorship, where they willingly submit to one supreme being. This goes against everything a Idealists* stands for.

Again, the Idealists* must level up and learn to adjust their approach in their relationships with the Survivalist*… Because the Survivalist* won’t.

the Survivalist* never/rarely feel embarrassed

Please be advised, as a Idealists*, you’ll recognize the Survivalist* easiest by the fact they are RARELY if ever, embarrassed about their own behavior. The Survivalist* may be embarrassed about not having the latest fashion or for not having the right job title, for not being married at an appropriate age, but they are rarely embarrassed by their behavior, lack of social graces, or inattention to others and their feelings. They are not shy to express negative or strong feelings in an inappropriate manner. This is PARTICULARLY true when they are romantically interested in someone.

While they may be embarrassed by not having the latest fashion, they are rarely embarrassed for wearing it wrong or having an otherwise unkempt or unflattering appearance. Obesity or old age doesn’t bother them, nor do they understand why physical beauty is valued by the Idealists*.

They are also rarely if ever embarrassed for not knowing something or making a mistake of intellectual nature, situations that are the Idealists* nightmare. Intellectual mistakes, to them, are not THEIR fault, but that of their teachers, no matter how old they are. Therefore, the Survivalist* may be embarrassed by not having the best teacher, but not that they didn’t know something.

To change the Survivalist*’s way of thinking, you must embarrass them or simply make them submit to your will. Both strategies are difficult and very unpleasant to a Idealists* to perform.

NOTE THAT the Idealists* do often wear quirky fashion items as a form of self-expression. They would never wear an item of clothing without knowing it’s non-verbal meaning.

The best question to ask to determine which thinker type someone (adult) is

Out of the two, what would be the worse thing to happen to you:

A) Your best friend or sibling would leave the town you’ve lived in since you were children so you no longer can meet them every time you want. OR (the Survivalist*)
B) You’d accidentally say something insulting to someone you thought was your soulmate on a first date, ruining the whole thing forever. (the Idealists*)

A Survivalist* would choose A pondering out loud why someone they haven’t even been in a relationship with yet would be that important to them and what is a soulmate anyway, so obviously A. An the Idealists* would say that although losing a friend or a sibling to another town would not be nice, it’s a part of life and growing up, and, it seems you can still meet on an occasion, but losing a soulmate would be devastating over a slip of a tongue… Or something along those lines.

The following is visible to all:

the Idealists* and the Survivalist*; basic differences

1. the Idealists* look for people who are already like them. The Survivalist* look for people who are willing to change for them.
2. the Idealists* are looking for their equals to form a relationship with. The Survivalist* are looking to form a hierarchical group/soup/couple with a clear leader.
3. the Idealists* are looking for their equals through conversation. The Survivalist* look for their equals in pissing off their new friends to see who stands up to them, or who has “staying power”, who will stick around even though it gets hard for them.
4. the Idealists*’ biggest fear is an embarrassment. The Survivalist*’ biggest fear is getting attached and then get abandoned. (This makes both types “date down”: I’ll never be embarrassed in front of that person. VS. That person will never feel they’re superior to me and thus likely to dump me.)
5. To a Idealists*, picking a fight means a breakup of a (budding) friendship. The Survivalist* sees picking a fight as an obvious means of making friends.
6. With a Idealists*, constant fighting will lead to a breakup. To the Survivalist*, constant fighting means the one constantly fighting is looking to bond deeper and is hiding something super sweet worth sticking around for.
7. the Idealists* tend to create rules to ensure individualistic freedom within the group. They choose a lifestyle and make friends from that group. The Survivalist* tend to dress very conservatively and lead a normal/typical lifestyle by default. They may change their lifestyle to fit into a new group of (prospective) friends.
8. Both types are malleable, but the Idealists* adjust willingly without a fight or not at all. You have to fight or embarrass the Survivalist* to make them alter their ways. (Both strategies are incredibly difficult.)

Subscribe to get a Daily Message