Survey Two Ways

I feel like gathering data, so here you go.

Use the code OLD SPORT in order to access the survey about Writing About Temperament 
Use the code BON TRAVAIL in order to access the survey about Trait Biases.

Let me know what you thought of the surveys in the comment section!

I Don't Know, That Never Came Up On My Radar: On Being an Anti-Empath

This is purely empirical and not based on any kind of science.
 
If you are crying, I will walk away and leave you to your own devices. It's not that I don't care, but it's more that I simply don't know what to do. If you clearly asked me to comfort you, I would. However, I need that explicit instruction. It is not that I choose to block out the emotions of others, but that they just simply don't come up on my radar. If you are an empath or regular person trying to understand anti-empaths, please understand that we're not all horrible people. Some of us really do try to understand emotions, but just don't know.

I have had people close to me die and I didn't grieve. It's not that I didn't miss those people, but I just never felt a need to do so. Lacking these experiences is very alienating as it tends make people judge me as "heartless" and "insensitive" (the latter of which is partially true). I tend to leave people to their own devices out of the logical understanding that they understand their situation better than I do, so, by leaving someone to their own devices when I cannot help in a practical manner, I am actually trying to help in my own anti-empath way. The only way I can truly feel an emotional connection is through shared experience.

Anti-Empath Inventory Checklist

• You have remained completely unaffected by a "touching" story without having any objections to the content itself. 
• You feel that you "just can't get" emotions.
• You rarely cry for reasons other than physical pain. 
• You tend to walk away from grieving people and/or people in a state of distress you do not know the source of.
• You don't get the compulsions to help that others do.
• The only/strongly predominant way you can "get" emotions is through a common experience.
• You rarely donate to charity even though you have sufficient resources to support yourself.
• Others see you as even-keeled.
• You tend to lean towards pragmatic means to support others rather than emotional means.
• You like to leave people to their own devices.
• You predominantly understand emotions through a rational interface. 
• Even when you consciously seek emotional sensation, it is nearly impossible for you to achieve.

If 8 of these questions are true for you, you might to be an anti-empath.

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.

12 Days of Christmas-Temperament Edition

A pattern that's unique to me
2 social -versions
3 letters
4 Keirsey types
5 temperaments
6 variants
7 different systems
8 cognitive functions
9 sides of instinct
10 terrains of consciousness
11 DiSC types
12 LaHaye blends

Mentioned Temperament Systems:
Four Temperaments (LaHaye), Five Temperaments (not APS), Socionics, Enneagram, Jungian Functions, MBTI, KTS, DiSC, Ten Terrains of Consciousness

How I Came Up With Seven Different Systems:

• Four Temperaments and Five Temperaments are humoral systems.
• Jungian functions show the distribution of intelligences and energies. 
• Socionics uses the same letters as MBTI, but it is not MBTI.
• KTS is directly related to MBTI.
• DiSC is indirectly related to the four temperaments. 
• Enneagram measures the general direction of one's intelligences.
• Ten terrains of consciousness measures basic instincts.

My Known Temperaments:

• LaHaye Blend: ChlorSan
• Fie Temperaments: Choleric and Supine (Five Temperaments, Not APS)
• MBTI: ENTP
• Keirsey Type: Inventor Rational
• Socionics: ILE/ENTp
• DiSC: High D only
• Enneagram: 8w7 sx
• Jungian Functions: Ne, Ti, Fe, Si 

Disability and Temperament Survey

Survey Creator

If you cannot access the survey via the embed, go here.
Code: FLUTIST