This is NOT Temperament!

(This is a full-on diatribe directed at a certain someone who has officially infuriated me. In this post, I abandon my usual composure and rant about a certain popular Asperger's blogger's "temperament system." You have been warned.)

I'm linking to the original using a rel=nofollow attribute because this information is blatantly erroneous and potentially harmful. (Date of Access: February 21, 2016) Quoted text from the article is in blue.

There are nine different types of temperaments in Aspergers kids:

• Distractible temperament predisposes the youngster to pay more attention to his or her surroundings than to the teacher.
• High intensity level temperament moves the youngster to yell, scream, or hit hard when feeling threatened.
• Hyperactive temperament predisposes the youngster to respond with fine- or gross-motor activity.
• Initial withdrawal temperament is found when kids get clingy, shy, and unresponsive in new situations and around unfamiliar people.
• Irregular temperament moves the youngster to escape the source of stress by needing to eat, drink, sleep, or use the bathroom at irregular times when he or she does not really have the need.
• Low sensory threshold temperament is evident when the youngster complains about tight clothes and people staring and refuses to be touched by others.
• Negative mood temperament is found when kids appear lethargic, sad, and lack the energy to perform a task.
• Negative persistent temperament is seen when the youngster seems stuck in his or her whining and complaining.
• Poor adaptability temperament shows itself when kids resist, shut down, and become passive-aggressive when asked to change activities.

I can see how you tried to understand Asperger's and temperament. However, most of these "temperaments" are descriptions of behavioral problems and not actual temperaments. Temperaments include strengths as well as weaknesses, assets as well as inhibitors. Certain temperament types do lead to certain behavioral problems, but temperaments in and of themselves are not behavioral problems.  Neither are behavioral problems temperaments.

I don't know how you came to nine specific "temperaments". I know that the enneagram has nine types within its system, but this hodgepodge of behavioral problems does not even begin to resemble enneagram types, even with a ton of stretching and twisting of these descriptions. This leads me to think that you did not study what the enneagram is or any system, for that matter. The rest of the post also gives off this strong "Asperger's is extreme Si" vibe. Why bother creating a "temperament system" when you don't even bother with the fact that people exist in a variety of temperaments?

The descriptions themselves look like they have been Google translated from another language. If someone originally wrote these in another language, you should have the basic human decency to credit the person who wrote it in the original language and mention that the text was translated from another language. I saw no such credit to any original author. If this is the case, you just stole someone's intellectual property without at least crediting them. If that is not the case, then this is just plain incoherence. This is a prominent website, so I expected better quality work than this. Please have the decency to name your work what it actually is. "Nine Types of Asperger's-Related Traits and Behaviors" would NOT have caused me ANY issue.

You have a degree. Please AT THE BARE MINIMUM take the time to look up information about other temperament theories before coming up with your own. The "low sensory threshold" thing is not a temperament. It is a neurological issue and, quite frankly, the only item on your list that is not a behavioral problem or merely a temperamental trait. People of a variety of temperaments can be intense, but for different reasons. For someone with an M.A. that you so publicly display, I am flabbergasted at the blatant misuse of the word "temperament" throughout your constructed system (and I am NOT at ALL selective about temperament systems). I know that everyone makes mistakes, but this is just a display of willful ignorance.

It is frustrating for me to maintain what little composure I have after reading this. A bit of research (as in: reading ONE article at the top of a web search) on the thing you were reporting on (and I use the terms "research" and "reporting" VERY loosely) would have prevented this atrocity of a "temperament theory" from coming into fruition. This is even worse than Keirsey's ADD hoax (and THAT was terrible).

Not only have you created this atrocity of a temperament theory, but you misuse the word meltdown as well. Meltdowns are not manipulative behaviors like tantrums, yet you cited "to get attention, get someone to listen, protest not getting their way, get out of doing something they do not want to do, punish a teacher for going away, for power, for revenge, fear of abandonment, etc" as meltdown causes. This shows that you do not know what meltdowns are and have, again, failed to do the simplest of research, which can simply to ask autistic people and those who know them for their input on meltdowns. The difference between a meltdown and a tantrum is basic common sense for anyone who knows remotely about autism. For being an "expert", you wrote one of the most willfully ignorant articles I have seen on the Internet. What I have drawn from your article is the following: (basically TL;DR)

Condescending attitude towards aspie students (continual use of "youngster")

Lack of knowledge of temperament

Not knowing what meltdowns are

Overall lack of research

Possible intellectual property theft 

Asperger's temperamental stereotypes despite the fact that you attempted to make a temperament theory

Overall, the only information I derived from this article was that you do not know what temperament theory is. I received no helpful information, just sheer lack of research. In conclusion, if you want people to use your resources, do your research! Again, I use the term "research" VERY loosely, so your research can be as simple as a quick glance at any kind of temperament website like Fighunter or 16personalities or actually getting to know the people you are reporting on. The education methods you mentioned also do not work for every single student. Not everyone operates well in the same strictly-controlled, sensory-sterile environment, something you should know very well as someone reporting on education. However, since you did not bother to take into account the aspies that need an open-ended approach, such as myself, that just speaks to your lack of professionalism in this article. Not everyone will trust you just because you have a degree that you likely display for the sake of looking credible. Some people actually read your work, so write accordingly!

Sincerely,
A Repulsed Choleric-Sanguine ESTP Aspie

Additional Note: I don't know about the overall credibility of the website itself, but this article is definitely on the lower end of things. Correct me if I am wrong, but this site appears to be intended to appeal to desperate parents stuck in cognitive function loops. Other material on the site might be okay, but don't use this site as your predominant source for Asperger's information.

The HTML went haywire, which explains the weirdly-colored text.

Introvert Privilege Checklist

I've seen a lot of "Extroverts oppress introverts and are the privileged social -version" content, but introverts are very privileged as well, just in different areas. That's why I made an introvert privilege checklist. 

• You don't get bored because you have your musings to entertain you.
• You don't feel as bad about social unavailability.
• You are automatically regarded as more intelligent and authentic.
• You can have your emotional needs met without worrying about being annoying or attention-seeking. 
• You can call going the Internet and reading a few comments your social interaction for the day.
• You are rarely or never accused of being a phony.
• Your emotions are considered real and valid and are not dismissed as "stupid mood swings." 
• Your emotional needs as a whole are considered more valid because you can fulfill them without worrying about being too obtrusive.
• You don't need the validation and admiration of others.
• You are perceived as more trustworthy, sensitive, and empathetic.
• You can easily find relatable Internet content.
• You can pursue a creative hobby and not need to show it off.
• You cope with ostracism more easily.
• You are seen more as an individual than an overly-specific archetype.
• You don't "need" the company of others the way others do.
• You have no worries about coming on too strongly.
• You can create your own company.
• You don't feel the compulsive need to win others' approval through absurd means. (e.g. eating 100 fruit stickers)
• Your feelings of being misunderstood are readily validated and affirmed by others.
• Your speech actually means something to other people and isn't received as content-free babble.

How it Works:

Your introvert privilege score is the amount of statements you agreed with out of the total (which is 20). 

My introvert privilege score: 3/20. What's yours?
Additional Information:
Temperament: Choleric-Sanguine (ChlorSan)
MBTI: ENTP-A

• Keirsey Type: Inventor Rational

Enneagram: 8w7 sx
Sociotype: ILE (ENTp)

• Relative Quadra: Gamma
• Socionics Functions: 
• Leading: Ne
• Creative: Ti
• Role: Se
• Vulnerable: Fi
• Suggestive: Si
• Mobilizing: Fe
• Ignoring: Ni
• Demonstrative: Te

DiSC: High D

Hey, Wendy Katz! Not All Extroversion Is Sanguine

An autistic jobseeker under the name of "Wendy Katz" wrote about a specific form of temperamental discrimination known as extroversion bias here. This person learned how to feign extroversion on personality tests and answer lie scales to mirror a neurotypical person. As the official DiSCability blogger and pretty much the archetypal ENTP, I felt like I needed to deconstruct and analyze this piece and its ideas.

I am an extrovert myself. This person misunderstands the concept of extroversion (probably due to EEOC criteria) as "friendliness, preference for group interaction, skill with people, large amounts of happiness, etc." when this is a small facet of a specific variety of extroversion known in humoral theory as the sanguine temperament. Sanguines are generally friendly, upbeat, charismatic, and generally have the image people want to see. However, not all extroversion is sanguine as Katz seems to say.

This is not to say that I dislike this piece in its entirety. Actually, I rather relish the fact that someone bothered to point out the fact the adverse effects of temperamental discrimination. However, this person claims that extroversion is sanguine, which is wrong. Extroversion is also choleric. Cholerics are the "control freaks" (totally true) of the world. The people who ascend the corporate ladder, overthrow the system, and speak out with new, innovative ideas are most likely choleric.

The term "Extroversion bias" Katz uses actually refers to "Sanguine bias". The traits listed above all correspond to the sanguine temperament when lumped together into one temperamental pattern. They do not fit the choleric temperament although the choleric (especially the choleric-sanguine) tends to be good at being a "pseudosanguine" in order to ascend to more dominant positions. Introverts can be pseudosanguine, but it is generally more difficult. Choleric extroverts are generally more interested in getting the job done than having fun, which can make the choleric appear/be unfriendly despite the fact that the choleric is indeed an extrovert.

Please do not misunderstand what extroversion is based on this piece. The temperamental discrimination Katz describes is not extroversion bias, but it is sanguine bias. The EEOS stands for "Equal Employment Opportunity Commission", but its practice of temperamental and disability discrimination makes me wonder if they are what they claim to be at all. Sanguine bias is a problematic barrier for autistic jobseekers whatever their temperament is.

Discussion Questions

• Have you ever encountered sanguine bias when being employed?
• If you are an employer, what are you going to do to prevent sanguine bias?
• Do you think sanguine bias is problematic? Why or why not?
• Do you think "sanguine bias" or "extroversion bias" better describes what kind of temperamental discrimination Katz experienced? Explain why. 

"Special Needs" Applies More to Temperament Than it Does to Disability

(Possible Trigger Warning: Ableist quotes with temperament in place of disability. This is intended to be humorous/satirical.)

Needing to eat, drink, excrete wastes, sleep, learn, live in adequate shelter, have society, be as emotionally secure as possible, and to have a means of meeting these needs are among the universal needs of humans. However, when those needs have to be met unconventionally, especially in the case of disability, they become "special".

The term "special"  means "specific for a person, place, or circumstance." Universal needs are not special needs no matter how they are met. Every human has these needs regardless of any other factors. The term "special needs" in reference to disability presents universal needs among the disabled as a foreign concept. Universal needs are universal needs regardless of who has them, how they are fulfilled, or which needs crop up at what time.

On the contrary, temperamental needs are not universal to every person, but are not called "special" needs. Most people recognize temperamental needs as valid although not everyone has the same temperamental needs. Temperamental needs are more "special" than disability-related needs as they are specific to one's temperament. However, most people accommodate the temperamental needs of others and discuss temperament in order to bridge rifts and promote morale in businesses. I have never heard of anyone being actively discriminated against based on their DiSC type or MBTI. However, discussion of disability-related needs, which are in direct correlation with universal needs, seems to create rifts between others rather than bridge them. Discrimination based on disability is more common than discrimination based on temperament. (I can't use statistics for effect because I don't have empirical data on this.)


I have also never heard anyone say the following:

"Oh, you're supine? That's such a pity. I had a relative who used to be a supine, but with (arcane pseudoscience/therapy/hard work/abuse), s/he became (other temperament).

"You're not a real sanguine. I know X, who is a real sanguine."

"You must be a very high-functioning phlegmatic."

"It's 'person with melancholy,' not 'melancholic!"

"I could see why X murdered their choleric child. Cholerics are such a burden on society. These pseudo-choleric 'advocates' have no idea what they're talking about. Haven't they walked in a parent's shoes?"

I see less active perpetuation of negative temperamental stereotypes than I do with disability stereotypes. Sure, there are negative temperamental stereotypes, but they are strongly discouraged and are rarely used to attack others. Temperament enthusiasts also take into account other factors that can play into making the individual such as upbringing, physical health, life experiences, gender, age, and other factors. With disability, however, diagnostic overshadowing leads one to overlook these factors along with temperament.

Diagnostic overshadowing can lead one to believe that temperamental characteristics are parts of a disability/illness when they are not. A choleric and a phlegmatic with the same condition will manage it differently. The choleric goes about their life with great levels of alacrity and energy no matter their
 circumstances while phlegmatics are more laid-back. Diagnostic overshadowing would lead one to believe that the said choleric's illness is "not that bad" when the choleric is just using their internal motivation to work around their illness. Meanwhile, the phlegmatic's fatigue may look like the main
issue when it is not. The choleric's temperamental needs are control and dominance, which a
phlegmatic avoids because assertion taxes their energy reserves.

My question is: Why are disability needs considered "special" and dismissed when they are just about how universal needs are met when temperamental needs, which are not universal, are considered and validated as actual needs?  I am an autistic choleric-sanguine, not a choleric-sanguine with autism or an autistic with choler and sanguine. My autism-related needs are as valid as my choleric-sanguine-related needs. These parts make the whole I am. Take away either part and I will not be who I am. My need for control is more "special" than my need to avoid foods that will make me vomit. I wish for all needs to be respected as valid no matter what they are and how they are to be met.

The Mighty Practices Temperamental Discrimination

Every time I go on The Mighty, I see very little variety to the content and the way it flows. The stories tend to focus on emotions. They are clearly edited to fit a temperamental pattern. The Mighty claims to promote diversity, but they seemed to overlook temperamental diversity as an integral part of life with a disability. The stories seem to all come from multiple with the same reason for why they act the way they do. Thus, I think The Mighty is discriminating against writers of certain temperaments.

As a DiSCability blogger, I find it important that all temperaments get represented in the disability community. Most of The Mighty's content is posted by allies sharing their experiences as parents or those who are grieving the loss of their children. This alone concerns me because I would not run a violin store as a flutist who has never picked up a violin. Lists of things you wish others knew, not to say, and other compilations as well as the occasional "embracing myself" post penned by disabled writers are also common. Photo shoots are also popular pieces. 

But with such diversity, how can you possibly accuse them of the lack thereof?

All of these are clearly meant to appeal to people of the melancholic temperament. Sensitive, perfectionistic, and passionate, melancholics seem to make the perfect typical voice to drown out the disabled, right? At least The Mighty thinks so. The Mighty favors the meticulous melancholics while ignoring social sanguines, commanding cholerics, peaceful phlegmatics, and their perspectives. Even if one of these temperaments happens to slip under the editors' eyes, it is usually because they write with a melancholic style. 

In an already strongly predominantly melancholic community, temperamental diversity should be promoted and not squelched by publishing stories that follow the same archetypes that are clearly meant to appeal to the same temperament. Phlegmatics can write about how their "go with the flow" approach to life with their disability. Cholerics can contribute pragmatic, objective viewpoints as well as mobilize others to execute their visions. Sanguines can use their lighthearted sense of humor to prevent others from thinking of disability as an inherently sad or pitiful experience. It takes all four temperaments to show true diversity, not one. If you work for or support The Mighty, take the time to truly show "real people" and "real stories". This includes allowing each contributor to show their temperament. If you are actively protesting against The Mighty, use the tags #NotSoMighty and #TheMelancholy on your main mode of social media and talk about the systemic temperamental discrimination that runs rampant on the site.

Image Description: White text on a red background that reads "Real people. Real stories. Only melancholics' perspectives are real, though. Sanguines, phlegmatics, and cholerics need not contribute." "People" and "Stories" are bold. This is a satirical parody of The Mighty's slogan.

The Explanation Extroverts Owe Introverts

I asked Jack, a regular author at Disability Diaries, for his opinion on extroverts and introverts. This is what he had to say:

 

Image Text is as Follows: I think extroverts are good within reason, bring an introvert primarily after being around them for while I get cranky and annoyed. Introverts like quiet and solitude. they value having time alone to recharge so to speak. Most of if not all of my close friends are introverts. You may use these for your blog.

Dear Introverts:

 

First of all, I'd like to apologize on behalf of every member of extrovert-kind that you have ever met and will meet. As an extrovert, I understand that I can come off too strong. Extroverts like stimulation and interaction and, though an extrovert can survive without these things, they need them to thrive as much as introverts need quiet and solitude. We get cranky and annoyed if insufficiently stimulated just as you might when overstimulated.

We extroverts get that introverts need time alone to recharge and can respect that. However, extroverts need others to recharge and we demand an equal amount of respect for our needs. There is a noticeable imbalance between introvert content and extrovert content on the Internet and that in and of itself is not a bad thing, but very little material under #extrovert is written for extroverts and even less of it is written by people who openly identify as extroverted.

The extroverts you meet are rarely intentionally out to annoy introverts. They just take social events as an opportunity to recharge and need you to fill their battery, so to speak. Many extroverts feel guilty about recharging in different ways from introverts and fear being dismissed as shallow and attention-seeking. Extroverts keep their energy reserves on the surface. We do not have infinite energy; we just keep our energy reserves on the surface rather than at our core. The extrovert that comes off too strongly may actually just be tired and need to recharge.

There are also different varieties of extroversion. Sanguine extroversion is represented the most often. Extroverts of the sanguine variety are the "party animals" and the perpetual movers. Sanguine extroverts are the outgoing, fun extroverts that love any excuse to put on a show. Choleric extroversion manifests itself as a need for control. Choleric extroverts are not represented as extroverts as often as sanguine extroverts are. They are generally  more industrious and resolute than sanguine extroverts.Though the choleric sometimes does not socialize, cholerics are indeed extroverts. After all, a choleric can't rise above the heads of a crowd of one.

I understand that extroverts can have an overwhelming presence, but the need to replenish own energies, rather than the intent to drain others' energies, lies behind the flashy exterior. We extroverts are tired of having our needs dismissed and that will increase our "annoying" factor. Sufficiently-"fed" extroverts are balanced, charismatic leaders that will consider the needs of others no matter what their social -version is. "Starving" extroverts are desperate and attention-seeking to the point where they have little care for the needs of others whether they are introverted or extroverted.

We don't really intend to be annoying or make you cranky. We just need the energy interactions give us. We also need your support and loyalty despite how irksome we can be when we are running low on emotional energy, not just "within reason" and when we are sufficiently fueled. Remarks like these hurt extroverts more deeply than you realize, especially sanguine extroverts. Extroverts, though we supposedly "have all the advantages in life" and "have the world made for us," also have needs that are just as valid as those of introverts. I hope you will take this into account when dealing with "annoying" extroverts.

Yours Truly,

The Official Extrovert Ambassador (Self-Appointed)

FlutistPride

Autistic/ADHD ENTP (#16Disabilities)

I am an autistic ENTP. Since being an ENTP is a fairly new identity to me, I cannot delve into it as deeply as I would like to. ENTPs are, as a rule, dynamic and adaptable. ENTPs enjoy diving headfirst into new ideas and experiences. They are curious and a witty sense of humor. This MBTI opposes the stereotypical image of "autistic person," which is why I appear to be very "high-functioning" to most people (or maybe I'm a low-functioning ENTP).

I never really feel flustered or upset during breaks in the routine. In fact, I welcome reprieve from the routine. I intuited some aspects of social skills using my thinking function. I did things because no one said I couldn't do them. I pushed boundaries, experimented, gained awareness of the world through ideas, and took on seemingly insurmountable challenges. I had it easier than most, but no life is ever without its downfalls.

I didn't know I was an ENTP until recently. I mistyped as INTJ due to my pretending to be an introvert. Part of that I attribute to being in an introverted family and another part is fear of failure in general. I would rather have the entire world collapse around me than fail to meet a goal I have set for myself. For me, being an extrovert, rejection is failure. I feel rejection is a symphony of pain. The acute stabbing pangs of initial, direct rejections and dull, lingering aches from repeated or perceived rejections leave me erecting defensive walls as armor. 

Most things I do I do out of spite or sheer curiosity. I have rapidly shifting passions and find it difficult to commit to one thing. In order to decide that I wanted to play flute, I tried every other instrument available (clarinet, trumpet, euphonium, and saxophone) before deciding on the flute. It is not uncommon for me to stick with something I did on an impulse. I joined band entirely on a whim and it's an impulse I'm glad I followed. I also started blogging on an impulse, sometimes shifting my niche with no apparent reason other than that I need spontaneity. "P" types tend to be spontaneous in their doings.

I tend to move and fidget when I sit and take notes, but not very conspicuously. I'll jiggle my leg, twirl a pencil, and doodle random things. When I read, I listen to music when I do it because it helps me focus. Others would think it a distraction, but it helps me. I need immersive environments in order to be productive while others would find such a thing overwhelming. In order to swim, I need a "sea of stimulation," as I would call it, whereas others who are content with stimulation pools would feel like they are drowning. I like diving right into new ideas and experiences, but it takes me a few deep breaths to work up the courage to jump into the water.

Image Description:

1.  A horizontal bar graph titled "Your personality type is the debater (ENTP-A). Next to the graph is a fair-skinned, dark-haired man drawn in a geometric style smirking and saying "May I point out a couple mistakes in your argument?" At the bottom is a cyan button that says "Send results by E-mail."
1. Green bar=21% Extraverted 
2. Blue bar=56% Intuitive
3. Red bar=30% Thinking
4. Yellow bar=18% Prospecting 
5. Purple Bar=9% Assertive

Don't Let Them In, Don't Let Them See

I don't have (or at least never used) the chameleon function described among most aspie females. Social isolation hurt me, but more deeply than I realized. I longed for the spotlight, to walk up onstage and address my peers, and to perform, but I couldn't work up the courage. I denied these desires for fear of being seen as egotistical or attention-seeking. It was a perpetual cycle of "I want it, but I can't," a vicious cyclone that rent my soul every day.

By pretending to not want society as much as I did, I coped with the cycle by repressing my desires to be with others. In order to please myself and others, I pretended to be introverted. I read about introverts feeling relieved about embracing their introverted selves and not pretending to be extroverted. However, I found that some of these people called extroverts phony or shallow while venerating introverts as insightful and intelligent. I eventually came to believe this until I re-examined myself and my responses.

I gather energy from my environment. My mood shifts according to my overall surroundings, so, if I can change environments quickly enough, I can avoid mental fatigue. As much as I like to think, I hate the idea of sitting still all day with only my mind to occupy me. I like learning about others' ideas and promoting my ideas while I'm at it. Performance appeals to me more than sitting in the audience. As much as I enjoy being around others, I prefer that it has a purpose. However, I find myself talking to random people simply because I can.

When I first discovered temperament theory, I mis-tested as MelSan, then MelChlor, and then ChlorMel when I am, in fact, a ChlorSan. I read too much into what I do rather than how and why I do it. For example, my analytical tendencies are a traditional melancholic trait, but I analyze (1) because it makes me feel powerful and (2) it's fun for me to analyze things. I avoid competition although I enjoy it mainly because, knowing myself, I would have a poor reaction to losing. Though I can get over my angry outbursts quickly, others will not. However, when forced into competition, I take it seriously and have a strong desire to win. I have learned to lose gracefully, at first because I would be "superior" to sore losers, and then it came naturally to me.

The online disability community has a temperamental pattern whether it is real or feigned. Instead of bringing my ChlorSan perspective to the table, I tried to fit into the predominantly melancholic community. I felt like I was accepted partially, which never satisfied me. Day in and day out, I wore the melancholic mask and even misled some of you into believing that I was. For that, I apologize and I hope you can forgive me.

I am an extrovert and finally proud to be one. I say "extrovert" because I am technically an extroverted ambivert, but my main preference is towards extroversion. By pretending to be an introvert, I managed to survive, but, by being the extrovert I really am, I will thrive. I not only crave interaction, but I need it. It energizes me in the way a good book or quiet time can energize an introvert. Extroverts envy introverts because introverts can do something unobtrusive to recharge or avoid boredom while extroverts need more stimuli to keep occupied. Extroverts are sometimes dismissed as loud or annoying when we are trying to recharge. Very little content written under the #Extrovert tag is written by extroverts. People say the world is built for us even though teachers discourage talking and "silence is golden".

Being an extrovert does not mean that I am any less intelligent or that my ideas are any less valid. It does not mean that my experiences or identities are any less real. Rather, I experience the world in a way that is different from introverts. Neither social -version is superior to the other; they are just different factors in one's perspective.

Being the good girl I always had to be meant pretending to be an introvert. My mind told me to keep silent, but my heart wanted to speak out and my body wanted to act. I did not want to impulsively blurt something I would regret later, so I kept my head down and said nothing. I learned to internalize everything despite my instincts to externalize. I learned that I would be annoying if I tried to obtain the stimulation I needed, egotistical if I tried to obtain the spotlight I craved, and that my needs were less valid than those of my introverted counterparts. I was told that I was inherently strong and happy, even when I wasn't, that I had the advantage even when I had the disadvantage. Does this sound familiar?

Part of me denying my extroversion comes from previous misconceptions about what introversion and extroversion are. I thought extroverts were perpetually outgoing, always confident, and never shy. However, I am a blend of the two extroverted temperaments (choleric and sanguine) and I can be quite shy (especially if I'm meeting my idol), lack confidence, and/or appear withdrawn at a social event (particularly if I'm shy at the moment.) Denying my social -version would be like denying that I am autistic, Asian, or female--and I have no intention of doing that.

Song: Let it Go-Idina Menzel