June 02, 2005

• "You are 28% Rational, 14% Extroverted, 42% Brutal, and 42% Arrogant." "You are the Emo Kid, best described as a quiet pussy! You tend to be an intuitive rather than a logical thinker, meaning you rely more on your feelings than your thoughts. Not only that, but you are introverted, gentle, and rather humble. You embody all the traits of the perfect emo kid. You are a push-over, an emotional thinker, gentle to the extent of absurdity, and so humble that it even makes Jesus puke. If you write poetry, you no doubt write angsty, syrupy lines about depression, sadness, and other such redundant states of emo-being. Your personality is defective because you are too gentle, rather underconfident in yourself, decidely lacking in any rational thought, and also a bit too inhibited." "I probably made you cry, didn't I? &%^$(#$ Emo Kid." No, but thanks for the deep personal insight (you anal-retentive bastard you.) Glad I could at least make Jesus puke!
• I am the Braggart. I RULE!!
• Brute You are 42% Rational, 28% Extroverted, 57% Brutal, and 71% Arrogant. But only when I drink...
• Hey, I made Jesus puke too. Is that worse than making baby Jesus cry?
• Baby jesus is always crying, but only pukes on occasion, so no.
• You are 85% Rational, 14% Extroverted, 85% Brutal, and 42% Arrogant. You are the Spiteful Loner, the personality type that is most likely to go on a shooting rampage. You are a rational person and tend to hold emotions in very low-esteem; not only that, but you are also rather introverted, meaning you probably bury any emotions you feel deep inside yourself. Combine these traits with your hatred of others and your brutality, and it seems that you would be quite likely to shoot innocent people in a rampage. Not only that, but you are also a very humble person--not a braggart at all--meaning you could possibly have low-self esteem. This is only yet one more incentive to go on a shooting rampage, because you wouldn't care if you died as a result. Granted, you probably haven't gone on a shooting rampage and probably never will, but all the motivations are there. In conclusion, your personality is defective because you are too introverted, brutal, insecure, and rather unemotional. No wonder no one hangs around you, you morbid, cold-hearted freak! --- Fuck, I should be scared of myself according to this :P
• Well, depends on where you stand in relationship to the crying/puking continuum, of course. Oh, nevermind . . .
• I think the test dictate that I would not make baby Jesus cry or puke, but would suck the marrow from his tiny, holy, bones.
• I would apparently make baby Jesus hate me. I'm the hand-raiser. It certainly was true at school.
• You and I were competing to get picked, tracicle.
• Smartass. Heh.
• Robot You are 71% Rational, 42% Extroverted, 28% Brutal, and 14% Arrogant. ...What?
• Haughty Intellectual You are 100% Rational, 14% Extroverted, 28% Brutal, and 57% Arrogant. Yep.
• Since I found other people's description's interesing, I'll post mine. (I didn't because it seems long.) You are the Haughty Intellectual. You are a very rational person, emphasizing logic over emotion, and you are also rather arrogant and self-aggrandizing. You probably think of yourself as an intellectual, and you would like everyone to know it. Not only that, but you also tend to look down on others, thinking yourself better than them. You could possibly have an unhealthy obsession with yourself as well, thus causing everyone to hate you for being such an elitist twat. On top of all that, you are also introverted and gentle. This means that you are just a quiet thinker who wants fame and recognition, in all likelihood. Rather lacking in emotion, introspective, gentle, and arrogant, you are most certainly a Haughty Intellectual! And, most likely, you will never achieve the recognition or fame you so desire! Sweet! Boy, I'm sure the MeFi crowd would strongly agree with this assessment. As well they should, because it's mostly true. I wonder if negative assessments may ring truer than positive assessments--and, if so, it's because we notice negative qualities (and probably stereotype the) more than positive ones.
• Spiteful Loner. I am 82% Rational, 28% Extroverted, 57% Brutal, and 14% Arrogant. My opposite is the Televangelist. Heh.
• I am "The Televangelist." Heh.
• *quietly marks the_bone down for shooting rampage*
• I am the Hand-Raiser. It means that I was the kid in the class who would annoy everyone by raising my hand to answer every question. While that may have been true through the fifth grade, it was anything but the truth after that. In sixth grade homework was introduced. From that point on (including college, etc.) I just hid as much as I could when the teacher asked a question.
• Another hand-raiser here.
• woot! *waves hand frantically*
• You are 100% Rational, 14% Extroverted, 28% Brutal, and 57% Arrogant. That's just creepy
• So is this test devised by a psychologist, psychiatrist, mental health professional, or just some cunt from Ealing?
• "That's just creepy" Indeed. Is our very specific personality type motivated enough to actually calculate the probabilities?
• You hand-raisers. *shakes head* Don't you know? You just gotta be super-aggressive answering those questions the first half-dozen times. Then they'll never call on you again whether you know your stuff or not. Uh, and then apparently if they do, you shoot them. LAURIE (smiling) Hey. You remember that nut in the hockey mask? With the asthma? What was his name . . . DREIBERG Oh yeah. The one that used to confess to everything? Hoping we'd beat him up? LAURIE That's the one. Whatever happened to him? DREIBERG (deadpan) He pulled it on Rorschach . . . and Rorschach dropped him down an elevator shaft. LAURIE looks aghast for a second and a half. Then her hand goes to her mouth -- and like DREIBERG she's GIGGLING helplessly.
• Since no one else has fessed up to this one yet... You are 85% Rational, 0% Extroverted, 57% Brutal, and 85% Arrogant. You are the Sociopath! As a result of your cold, calculating rationality, your introversion (and ability to keep quiet), your brutality, and your arrogance, you would make a very cunning serial killer. You care very little for the feelings of others, possibly because you are not a very emotional person. You are also very calculating and intelligent, making you a perfect criminal mastermind. Also, you are a very arrogant person, tending to see yourself as better than others, providing you a strong ability to perceive others as weak little animals, thus making it easier to kill them. In short, your personality defect is the fact that you could easily be a sociopath, because you are calculating, unemotional, brutal, and arrogant. Please don't kill me for writing mean things about you!
• Sociopath You are 100% Rational, 42% Extroverted, 71% Brutal, and 71% Arrogant. Don't feel bad cabingirl. Maybe we can go on a killing spree together.
• You're on, Bondurant.
• You are 42% Rational, 85% Extroverted, 71% Brutal, and 57% Arrogant. You are the Class Clown and this means that you are extroverted, mean, and arrogant. You are not very rational, so you gravitate towards things that produce feelings or emotions over thoughts (like fart jokes or spitballs, for instance). You are also an extrovert and rather full of yourself, so of course you want constant attention for yourself and think you are somehow better than others. You can also be a bit mean-spirited, and like a class clown you wouldn't hesitate to make a joke at someone else's expense, no matter how terrible it would make them feel. So your personality defects are that you have to be the center of attention, that you don't care about others, and that you are rather irrational and motivated by intuitions. apparently I should provide comic relief during the killing spree. cool!
• Hand-Raiser. Any hot Robots, Braggarts, or Haughty Intellectual biotches in the greater LA area are encouraged to give me a holla at michael.escher@gmail.com.
• Sociopath You are 100% Rational, 28% Extroverted, 71% Brutal, and 57% Arrogant
• Robot You are 71% Rational, 42% Extroverted, 28% Brutal, and 14% Arrogant. Your response will be processed shortly...
• Bone idle You are 100% too lazy to take the test
• Emo-Kid. duh except in my era, we were called indy-rock art students. now I'm just a dad.
• Smartass You are 57% Rational, 57% Extroverted, 85% Brutal, and 57% Arrogant. You are the Smartass! You are rational, extroverted, brutal, and arrogant. You probably consider people who are emotional and gentle to be big pussies who are obviously in lesser stature than you. You have many flaws, despite your seeming intelligence and cool-headedness. For instance, you aren't very nice. In fact, you're probably an asshole. And you are conceited and self-centered. Not only that, but you are very loud and vocal about all this, seeing as how you are extroverted. There is no better way to describe you than as a "smartass", I'm afraid. Perhaps just "ass" would do, too. But that's a little less literary and descriptive. At any rate, your main personality defect is the fact that you are self-centered, mean, uncaring, and brutally logical. To put it less negatively: 1. You are more RATIONAL than intuitive. 2. You are more EXTROVERTED than introverted. 3. You are more BRUTAL than gentle. 4. You are more ARROGANT than humble. Compatibility: Your exact opposite is the Emo Kid. Other personalities you would probably get along with are the Capitalist Pig, the Braggart, and the Sociopath.
• moneyjane, forgive me, but I can't help but wonder if I should consider your results representative of those who share your occupation; and, if so, what that might mean. Or not.
• I=exact opposite of Moneyjane. hmmmph.
• Rorschach, cabingirl, and Bondurant: I propose a contest to see who can go on the best killing spree the loners or the sociopaths. The only rule is that you must eat what you kill, and only what you kill. And then pee on it.
• I'm special! Bitch-Slap You are 14% Rational, 14% Extroverted, 57% Brutal, and 42% Arrogant. You are the Bitch-Slap, the hallmark response of any abusive husband! 1. You are more INTUITIVE than rational. 2. You are more INTROVERTED than extroverted. 3. You are more BRUTAL than gentle. 4. You are more HUMBLE than arrogant.
• I think you're onto something. I would think it true of those like myself who stay in the business for more than a year or so. Those with their eyes firmly on the ball (rational), willing to be larger than life (extroverted), willing to knock shit out of anybody who gets aggressive (brutal), and wily and pushy enough to make it in a very competitive outsider profession (arrogant)will make it. Those without those qualities probably won't. I imagine many actors probably score similarily. Heh. That's one of the other things I've been told I'm good at, and plan to pursue when this winds up.
• Sorry; my last post was in response to kmellis.
• Moneyjane: Yeah, but I think I'm prejudiced (negatively) about what I think your personality type is, most especially if sex work causes or substantially encourages it. I was wondering if your notably high brutality score indicates a degree of dehumanization of others in your personality (because it seems to me that brutality has an intimate relationship with dehumanization). Um, I can't really articulate these thoughts without being presumptuous. I offer my sincere apology (or is it regret?) about this. I'm deeply ambivalent about sex work. I strongly support it in principle and that it is a valid, and should be legal, choice. But the reality of it in our society with regard to women, is that a sex worker must make herself particularly vulnerable in a way she oughtn't have to--and that this is so is all the worse because it's in a mutually reinforcing relationship with our culture's misogyny. Put another way: I disagree with you and think that actors, for example, wouldn't have that high of a brutality score, wouldn't need such an exceptionally strong protective emotional shield because of their profession...but I think that it's theoretically possible that sex work could be on par with acting or anything else and not be exceptional. But all my assumptions and intuitions could be wrong, and my observations misleading.
• ...also, more generally, what they're getting at with "smartass" is, in my opinion, unhealthy. Note that being a smartass is kin to being sarcastic, and sarcasm is kin (and often confused by many people) to irony. Sarcasm is hostile, I think, and thus represents a reduced empathy. Irony, as a habit of thought, is best described, I think, as a particular variety of a relationship one has to other people and the experience of life in general. And I think it's an alienated, or at least dissociated, relationship. Oh, and I think I should mention that it's an intellectualized worldview, or habit of thought, that these have in common. (There are other, non-intellectualized modes that are hostile/dissociative.) Underlying this is my undefended assumption that being essentially in conflict or at least alienated from most other people is a bad thing. It may not be.
• An interesting and thought-provoking comment kmellis. I realise this test is hardly scientific, but I believe it is erroneous in suggesting that one can only be a smart-arse by being mean to people. It is perfectly possible to take shots at those who deserve it, at oneself and at the stupidities of life without resorting to picking on the weak.
• Emo kid. And I was trying to be very rational and not at all emotional when answering questions. But the fact that I'm proud of myself in that I didn't get my feelings hurt by my results probably says something.
• Hm, I get the impression that moneyjane would be pretty much the same regardless of what she did. It isn't the job that chose her, she chose it. That, in itself, takes a person with particular strengths. Plus, I believe that she would only have specific types of jobs, ie; ones that satisfied certain parts of her personality. Isn't that so with just about all of us?
• I'm a Brute!
• dj: Well, the requirements for being "mean" don't include that it is only limited to acts against the weak. Right? I'm making the value judgment that a habit of conflict is inherently bad. Others will not. Darshon: In an ideal world, we'd all take the jobs most suited to our personalities. This doesn't describe our world, probably not even Europe and North America. Secondly, if you'll indulge my assumption that there are personality traits which are "bad", then it wouldn't make sense to facilitate or encourage them, would it? Looking at it a different way, and using myself as an example, I think I'd argue that the negative traits more or less accurately described in my result are intimately related to my positive traits. So the simplistic solution of having a lifestyle that is in direct opposition to my negative traits is probably counter-productive. Instead, what would be better would be something that allows me to be accomplished and exceptional but discourages vanity and arrogance and narcissism; that allows me to play to my intellectual strength of rationalism but discourages the use of rationalism as an alienating (or insular) habit of thought. But I might well gravitate towards something that strongly encourages my negative qualities!
• Darshon's right; rationally, I made the decision to go into sexwork as a way to earn a lot of money quickly - or at least the possibility of such - then found that it made the negative parts of my personality very useful and the positive aspects monetarily valuable. It doesn't get much better than that. How often does anybody get to do something that meshes seamlessly with their personality? I'm working on a deal that will get me a very nice retainer in exchange for 25 hours or less of my time per month. I negotiated that deal. I made them pitch a number, which they did not want to do. That's something I would never have been able to do, even 6 months back. Knowing your value and making people either play it your way or walk is a very empowering thing, whatever your particular skill. I think that the brutality aspect is me getting done what needs to be done. I'm not a ditherer. A situation arises; I problem-solve, then do the right thing - though that may not be the right thing in someone else's eyes - and so stay true to myself. That can be construed as arrogance. I find I don't much dehumanize other people simply because I'd have to care enough about them in the first place to make that worthwhile. Underlying this is my undefended assumption that being essentially in conflict or at least alienated from most other people is a bad thing. It may not be. Dog trainers say the worst dogs to train are not those that are aggressive; but rather those who don't want anything. You have nothing they want, so they ignore you. So it is with loners. We may need something you have, but we don't need you. It pisses people off who don't get it because they're getting their sense of importance and value from those around them and we've just stiffed them. A very very good book on the topic of loners and the stigma around them is "Party of One; The Loner's Manifesto". If you are a loner it's wonderful to find your people; if not read it so you get that it's just not personal. Which, naturally, is the core issue for non-loners unable or unwilling to differentiate between indifference and hostility.
• I see being 'mean' as making fun or undermining the self-esteem of the undeserving or the 'weak', rather than making fun of the powerful or the deserving. I don't see someone taking the piss out of powerful cultural or political figures as being being 'mean'. Categorising a 'smart-ass' as someone who is mean to others doesn't really capture to my mind the trickster or type of person that pokes fun in order to deflate over-inflated egos or ridiculous institutions. I also think a smartass of the variety I describe is aware of the own failings and this is part of the reason they make fun of those who castigate others less powerful than themselves.
• Schoolyard Bully. You are 0% Rational, 57% Extroverted, 57% Brutal, and 14% Arrogant. Your exact opposite is the Haughty Intellectual. (Bullies like to beat up nerds, after all.) Other personalities you would probably get along with are the Bitch-Slap, the Capitalist Pig, and the Class Clown. Duh. Damn, I want to be the Bitch-Slap.
• Fuckwit 100% fuckwit. You're just a complete fuckwit. You have no redeeming or even vaguely interesting features whatsoever: please do us all a favour and drop dead, you useless fucking shit-for-brains. Harsh, but true. Good post!
• D'oh! my web-sweeper here at work says "Forbidden, this page (http://www.okcupid.com/tests/take?testid=4741219933576750506) is categorized as: Nudity". W T F ???? What does this say about my company's personality?
• Smartass here! 100% Rational, 100% Extroverted, 85% Brutal, and 71% Arrogant. I'm especially proud of the 85% Brutal. *winks at moneyjane*
• "You are 57% Rational, 42% Extroverted, 28% Brutal, and 0% Arrogant." I AM A ROBOT! DO AS I SAY! KILL! DESTROY! KILL! DESTROY!
• ("0% Arrogant"? Does not compute.)
• (I think what happened is that once I discovered alcomahol, I was quieted down from Sociopath to Spiteful Loner to gentle Robot...)
• i had problems with this from the get-go: 2. Do you prefer to work alone or in a group? I prefer to work alone. I prefer to work in a group. (well what are we talking about? if i'm working at work, that's definitely alone. but if i'm digging huge ditches, i want to be in a huge group.) 3. Do you tend to become angry or annoyed very easily? Yes, I am easily annoyed or angered. No, I am not easily annoyed or angered. (I BECOME ANNOYED WHEN I CANNOT ANSWER SIMPLE QUESTIONS SIMPLY) arg.
• I got a buck says SideDish is a handraiser.
• Starving Artist You are 14% Rational, 0% Extroverted, 0% Brutal, and 57% Arrogant. Other personalities you would probably get along with are the Haughty Intellectual, the Televangelist, and the Emo Kid. No mention of the Fuckwit. Whew. Wait, was that brutal?
• In short, your personality defect is that you don't really HAVE a personality. No surprise there.
• Bone idle You are 100% too lazy to take the test Hey, Abie'r, that makes two of us. We can so totally kick these wimps collective asses.
• Handraiser. So true. *sigh* "Can we please hear from someone *besides* Meredith?"
• Well, I totally would Blue, but y'know, it's so comfy here and ... great idea though. Maybe next time?
• (I think what happened is that once I discovered alcomahol, I was quieted down from Sociopath to Spiteful Loner to gentle Robot...) Funny, I think it went the other way for me. I was a Hand-Raiser once. Alcohol has apparently embittered me.
• Oh, piss. Televangelist. I swear I didn't try to rig this.
• Robot You are 71% Rational, 14% Extroverted, 0% Brutal, and 0% Arrogant. I am the pusher robot. I must protect you. Please go stand by the stairs.
• Smartass You are 85% Rational, 57% Extroverted, 57% Brutal, and 100% Arrogant. You are the Smartass! You are rational, extroverted, brutal, and arrogant. You probably consider people who are emotional and gentle to be big pussies who are obviously in lesser stature than you. You have many flaws, despite your seeming intelligence and cool-headedness. For instance, you aren't very nice. In fact, you're probably an asshole. And you are conceited and self-centered. Not only that, but you are very loud and vocal about all this, seeing as how you are extroverted. There is no better way to describe you than as a "smartass", I'm afraid. Perhaps just "ass" would do, too. But that's a little less literary and descriptive. At any rate, your main personality defect is the fact that you are self-centered, mean, uncaring, and brutally logical. _____ 100% arrogant. Daaaaayumn. And if I was more hot, I would kill to have moneyjane's profession. So I don't know what that says about anyone, but there you go.
• Robot You are 57% Rational, 14% Extroverted, 0% Brutal, and 42% Arrogant. You are the Robot! You are characterized by your rationality. In fact, this is really ALL you are characterized by. Like a cold, heartless machine, you are so logical and unemotional that you scarcely seem human. For instance, you are very humble and don't bother thinking of your own interests, you are very gentle and lack emotion, and you are also very introverted and introspective. You may have noticed that these traits are just as applicable to your laptop as they are to a human being. In short, your personality defect is that you don't really HAVE a personality. You are one of those annoying, super-logical people that never gets upset or flustered. Unless, of course, you short circuit. This isn't me at all. Except the introverted and introspective part.
• SK: I swear I didn't try to rig this. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Again, yet more evidence that we are, in fact, the same person.
• Hippie You are 28% Rational, 57% Extroverted, 14% Brutal, and 14% Arrogant. You are the Hippie! Characterized by a strong sense of extroversion, irrationality, gentleness, and humility, you no doubt frolic through fields preaching peace and love to all! You are probably either very spiritual or needlessly paranoid about "the man", like most hippies, as a result of your focus on intuition and feelings over cold, brutal logic. You are also very, very social. And like any hippie, who would have no qualms about hitchiking across the country just to meet some interesting people, you too love to interact with others, even complete strangers. Because we know most any hippie is peace-loving and humble, it stands to reason that you, as well, are terribly gentle and humble, almost to the point of revulsion. Your carefree attitude of peace and harmony is probably very, very sickening to realists or cynics or anyone who isn't a hippie, to tell the truth. In short, your personality is defective because you are overly emotional, extroverted, gentle, and humble--thus making you an annoying hippie. And you listen to psychadelic rock and smoke a whole lot of pot. Okay, maybe not, but I wouldn't be surprised if you did. I'm a hippie, can you believe it? I spend my time traipsing across the country, chasing down Joshua Trees and before you know it people start calling you a hippie. Well I'll be damned if I'll start listening to the greatful dead and wearing hippie skirts, but like it or not the description is pretty accurate
• I am The Robot.
• "It pisses people off who don't get it because they're getting their sense of importance and value from those around them and we've just stiffed them." I'd wager that I'm far, far more functionally a "loner" than are you. Not that I know what that means with regard to our respective attitudes about other people. I not only don't answer my phone, I turn the ringer off. I'm invited to social gatherings but attend only two or three a year. As a roommate, I stay in my room, always. I generally don't work well with other people, though there are a few exceptions. However, I really like other people a lot. I prefer to live where I can at least hear other people most of the time, even though I mostly don't want to interact with them. :) I don't really relate with people that strongly self-identify as "loners"--doing so seems to me to be alienated. That's why I've not been interested in the book you recommend, though I've heard about it before. The people closest to me are quite puzzled, really, about my personality because I'm very, very functionally a loner and that bothers them quite a bit; yet I'm very open emotionally, do get on well with other people when I'm around them...I'm kind, I think. Characteristics that are commonly associated with more social people. I see where you're coming from with what I've quoted; I think it's reasonably accurately descriptive. But I'd never say it the way you said it--it seems to me there's an undertone of resentment. Whereas my attitude about this (and other things) is that most people are different than me, no value judgment (in most cases) made.
• MonkeyFilter: all my assumptions and intuitions could be wrong, and my observations misleading. Dang GramMa, how did you miss that one? ;)
• Braggart You are 57% Rational, 57% Extroverted, 42% Brutal, and 57% Arrogant. You are the Braggart! Like Muhammad Ali, you would surely tell everyone that you are "The Greatest" whilst bragging incessantly about your intelligence, your skills, and your abilities. You tend to be a thinker rather than a feeler, and combined with your extroversion and arrogance, this makes you someone who probably just LOVES to brag about his accomplishments. Despite this, however, you are a very gentle, tender person and truly care about others' feelings. You just happen to care more about yourself. Unlike Ali, of course, you are rather rational as opposed to emotional, and you are also much more gentle. But his arrogance and extroversion best reflect the most visible aspects of your personality. Your personality defect is the fact that you are extremely overconfident, extroverted, and perhaps rather lacking in emotions. YOU ARE THE GREATEST! Or so you keep telling yourself every night, in hopes that eventually everyone else on the planet will agree. Well, sorry, we probably won't. I did not know that about myself.
• Way to go, Petebest! I hereby dub thee Prince Regent and Keeper of the Monkey Tags Behold, Monkeys, I bring forth my successor. Pete, see that you take this position with only goodness in your heart and with no intent to profit or hurt others.
• The description for Haughty Intellectual has a strange contradiction to it, I think. On the one hand, we're described as introverted loners; on the other, we want fame and recognition. For myself, I wouldn't disagree with the former, but I would take issue with the latter. It seems to me that if you're somewhat detached from the world, you're less likely to want fame and recognition from that world. I don't know. I think that I'm pretty ambivalent about it, but then I'm basically pessimistic about human beings (as a group), especially when they're in groups. (Consider Metafilter, a site full of intelligent people, but also home to a lot of nasty infighting, particularly on MeTa). Sarcasm is hostile, I think, and thus represents a reduced empathy. Irony, as a habit of thought, is best described, I think, as a particular variety of a relationship one has to other people and the experience of life in general. And I think it's an alienated, or at least dissociated, relationship. Oh, and I think I should mention that it's an intellectualized worldview, or habit of thought, that these have in common. I totally agree with this. Some people describe me as sarcastic, but I'm not mean in the way that sarcastic people can be (I don't think!), and I only do it with people I know well. That way I can tell what's appropriate and what isn't for that particular person. There's never any malice behind it and I like to avoid giving the impression that there is. It's just: I think that people, like life, are funny, often when they're not trying to be.
• no handraiser, me! >>Hippie You are 28% Rational, 85% Extroverted, 14% Brutal, and 42% Arrogant. says i'd get along with handraisers though. what about handlickers?
• I just noticed: "You are 57% Rational, 57% Extroverted, 42% Brutal, and 57% Arrogant" I don't have the time or energy to go back through & look: were any other monkeys so close to 50% on all four categories?
• Wish me luck on this test, everyone! I'm shooting for Hottie Intellectual!
• Well cynnbad, how'd you do?
• You are 85% Rational, 28% Extroverted, 0% Brutal, and 14% Arrogant.... Like a cold, heartless machine, you are so logical and unemotional that you scarcely seem human. WAAAAHHH! Don't wunna be a wobot!
• I like how I'm 0% rational.
• Muffpub, you should seek guidance from kmellis or Smo
• I, Robot. On the other hand, reflect that this measures only characteristucs shared with disorders, so there's no way you can be awarded a star for offsetting wonderfulness In fact, it has to bend your positive traits to fit them into the disorders basket (just in cast someone is taking this too seriously..)
• Christ on a crutch, I'm a Spiteful Loner!!! Yah, OK, I got that pressing-my-face-to-the-window thing going on. I guess put me in the rampage group. ... But not until I sell my shit on e-bay, so I don't have to deal with the fuckers personally.
• Or I might go postal and shoot everyone on the internet and beyond. Take that, homeland security! But the good news is I'm 50% either way. Not that this highly scientific test is any definitive measure.
• So I am hereby redesignating myself as a Spiteful Loaner. Any serious offers considered.
• Based on different answers to questions I felt ambivalent about, I'm either a Hippie, Spiteful Loner or a Robot. Whatever dooode, get off my lawn!, ♫ Daisy, Daisy..♫ I can't believe I did it three times.
• I'm sad I didn't get invited to the sociopath kill-off.
• But I'd never say it the way you said it--it seems to me there's an undertone of resentment. Whereas my attitude about this (and other things) is that most people are different than me, no value judgment (in most cases) made. Forgive me if I find those last two statements a bit contradictory. If Party A finds it necessary to try to prove to Party B that Party A is, in fact, more of a loner than Party B, well, Party B would be confused, wondering why, as a professed loner, Party A would give a flying fuck about what Party B thought. Party on!
• It was over pretty quickly Grover- I killed everyone.
• "If Party A finds it necessary to try to prove to Party B that Party A is, in fact, more of a loner than Party B" Party A wasn't trying to prove anything. Party A has no emotional investment in the label "loner". Why would Party B infer that? ..."wondering why, as a professed loner, Party A would give a flying fuck about what Party B thought." Party A thought this was a conversation and the only assumption of someone "giving a flying fuck" about Party A's thoughts were merely in the fact that they were participating in the conversation. Enough of this coyness. You are perfectly in the right to be testy because it was impolite and presumptious of me to take any armchair psychoanalytical position with regard to you. But all your suppositions about me in your last comment are wrong. Given the context, it's odd that you would be (attempting to) mind-read me? Why would you care? Anyway, the point I made was that while functionally I'm so much a loner that I might as well be a hermit (well, not so, if you count my net activity), I don't self-identify as a loner. If you ask someone to provide five adjectives which describe themselves, their answers may or may not represent what is actually true. But it does represent, of course, how they think of themselves and/or how they want others to think of them. "Loner" doesn't appear on my list. You've made it clear that it would appear on yours. I have no way of knowing whether that decribes reality. It could be very accurate, and you ought not think I was denying that.
• Party A wasn't trying to prove anything. Party A has no emotional investment in the label "loner". Why would Party B infer that? I'd wager that I'm far, far more functionally a "loner" than are you. Call me crazy. Given the context, it's odd that you would be (attempting to) mind-read me? Why would you care? Pointing out contradiction is not the same as attempting to mind-read anybody. And no, I don't care. And I agree. Enough with the coyness.
• Some of you guys are so far up your own asses (or arses as we say here) that I am glad that my damn web-sweeper wont let me near the site! There, thats my first (and hopefully only) "flame"
• Emo Kid You are 42% Rational, 42% Extroverted, 42% Brutal, and 28% Arrogant. You are the Emo Kid, best described as a quiet pussy! You tend to be an intuitive rather than a logical thinker, meaning you rely more on your feelings than your thoughts. Not only that, but you are introverted, gentle, and rather humble. You embody all the traits of the perfect emo kid. You are a push-over, an emotional thinker, gentle to the extent of absurdity, and so humble that it even makes Jesus puke. If you write poetry, you no doubt write angsty, syrupy lines about depression, sadness, and other such redundant states of emo-being. Your personality is defective because you are too gentle, rather underconfident in yourself, decidely lacking in any rational thought, and also a bit too inhibited. I probably made you cry, didn't I? Fucking Emo Kid. I'm drowning in holy, holy vomit.
• I am "The Robot", so you can all kiss my shiny metal ass! Hey Zaphod...glad the fagbrush incident didn't scare you off
• Judge, if I may, I'd like to point out that were I, in fact, that far up my own ass, you all owe me $5.00
• 'I'd wager that I'm far, far more functionally a loner than are you.' Call me crazy." You're crazy. That doesn't signal an emotional investment in identifying as a "loner". The clue is in the "functionally" part. I regularly go weeks without leaving my house. Many days without talking to another person. Days without leaving my bedroom. Everyone else tells me that this isn't normal. It may be pathological, but it also seems to be accurately described as "functionally a loner". That was the only point I was trying to make. I have no idea whether this is good or not; I don't have any interest, really, in promoting or even defending this lifestyle as "healthy" or "acceptable". I have no interest in convincing you to accept "loner" as a label that applies to me. But you've annoyed me so I do have an interest in convincing you that when I wrote "functionally a loner" I meant no more and no less than what I wrote. And I won't be coy: your sensitivity about this, your projection of attitudes on me that I don't have, your defensiveness, your recommendation of a book which explains 'loners' to other people...well, that doesn't, to me, seem like the behavior of someone who doesn't care what other people think. It seems like the behavior of someone who desperately wants to believe that she doesn't care what other people think...but still does.
• Like I've already said, there is a difference between pointing out contradiction and "caring about what other people think". I stand corrected; you aren't a loner, but rather a functional loner. I've already remarked on how non-loners can misinterpret loners, but perhaps this would be a good time to re-read it; If you are a loner it's wonderful to find your people; if not read it so you get that it's just not personal. Which, naturally, is the core issue for non-loners unable or unwilling to differentiate between indifference and hostility. I don't have much else to say on the topic that I haven't already said, and I think it would be a really good idea to drop this.
• Any hot Robots, Braggarts, or Haughty Intellectual biotches in the greater LA area are encouraged to give me a holla Holla. (nods haughtily and intellectually) (however, am not particularly hot)
• Goofyfoot, damn. When you gonna come to a meetup, girl? You've been invited several times. Hell, we'll put one on for just you. BTW, I aways rode goofyfoot on my skateboard and surfing. Holla.
• Jeez. I had no idea Squid and Goofyfoot had such a lurid past! Nobody tells me nuthin'.