[ISTJ: How Parentâs Personality Affects My Personality]
Parenting styles are the parentsâ perceivable attitudes towards the child, and these styles create an emotional climate in which the parentsâ behavior is expressed (Darling and Steinberg, 1993) (1). Belsky argued that parenting is multiply determined by three general sources of influence: childâs individual characteristics, contextual sources of stress and support, and parent personality. He further stated that of those three, personality is the most important source of influence (2). Parenting style does affect childâs personality, and itâs proven by dozens of researchers (1).
 I am the first child of a single parent mother (since about 12 years ago). So basically, I have been exposed to my momâs way of parenting for a long time (well, duh, for the rest of my life). I type my mom as an ESFJ.
As you all (might) already know, ESFJâs dominant function is Fe (extroverted feeling). She feeds me with it. She shows me that every day. As a child who mimics what my parent does, I follow and learn her way of thinking, making decisions, and dealing with people. My dad passed away when I was 10, and I assume he was an INTJ.
From her, I learn about social values; what is âgoodâ and what is âbadâ according to mainstream society a lot. I also learn how to care for people and how others are above anything. I, as a child/tertiary Fi user, am inclined to question those values and making my own values. But as my exposure to that kind of values is higher than my cynical Fi asking the root of the value (as it is tertiary), it becomes my Si and to me, itâs the ânormalâ thing. And I learned that I shouldnât be abhored by people in order to maintain harmony and peace (I soon added myself that it would give me additional profits â pardon my Te), so I shall not disobey the âmoral conductâ. Her Fe has been becoming my Si. And it affects my Fe too, of course. My Fe is higher than my Fi in my keys2cognition tests (42 vs. 17, respectively).
My Fe is on the 7th stack of personality, also called by âTricksterâ. Trickster, as described by Beebe, is what put us in a double bind (a situation in which a person is confronted with two irreconcilable demands or a choice between two undesirable courses of action). Beebe explained that for example, a parent (ESFJ) with Ni on her trickster to imply damage when an adolescent child threatens to make a choice that the parent does not approve of (3). In my case, it applies to my decision making. Trickster bothers âParentâ (Secondary function) much. And yes, my Fe always put me in a double bind. When Iâm about to take a decision that maybe unpreferable for other people, my Fe kicks in and makes me uber confused. It makes me indecisive and unable to hold my opinion and preferences because Fe would agree that holding things to oneself is selfish. I tend to over consider peopleâs feelings because I donât want to be hated by people (hence destroying my credibility). To this date, I am still not able to tame this.
Beebe also mentioned specifically about how a developed trickster should be. He picked a story about Alfred Hitchcock who was an ISTJ used his trickster Fe nicely. He was able to make people in a double bind with his Fe in order to cater his Te (parent/secondary) and Fi (puer/child/tertiary). That applies to me as well. I always look nice and agreeable to people, hiding my agendas and willings. I am usually mistaken as an ISFJ due to this demeanor. I persuade them to do my agendas with my Fe. This works well most of the time and they usually listen to my âcommandsâ. I understand that giving direct orders without any sweet talking wonât be effective to make people move, therefore I ask them nicely, minimizing the sweet talks (I hate it so much) but still in an acceptable manner (sometimes I include innuendos).
Trickster is also a ârebel childâ in Beebeâs archetype, so just like rebel children do, I rebel with Fe a lot (this might be in cooperation with my Fi, in attempt to make my own moral values). I question social values, reject them, and try to find a logic behind my rejection. But as much as I rebel, I usually comply with whatâs normal (remember that my momâs Fe has become my Si?). For instance, lately, Iâve been questioning why men and women canât be in a platonic relationship. Why men always took my kindness in a wrong way (romantically involved). That time I was having a lot of male friends on my network, without feeling anything specifically to one of them except pure friendship, but still, they want something (love) from me. My Fe rebels, because the society says that men will /always/ want something when it comes to women. And as a dignified woman, you canât go out with different men privately because it will spread bad news about you (playgirl, two-penny girl, blah blah). I canât reckon WHY. It doesnât make sense at all, at least for me. For me, itâs purely the men with expectations fault. And that time I wonât budge from what I believe. But as the guys keep on coming with expectations that I canât fulfill and realizing how sucks it is, I quit. I wonât be that woman again. I canât bear the peopleâs opinion about me doing this â even my close friends view me differently that time.
My questioning habit indicates my Fe is on stage 3 of function-attitude lifecycle according to Dario Nardi. He stated that on that stage, âWe âgraspâ the function in its many forms; we question, alter, personalize and make it our own, as a tool with many options; its use is complex and flexibleâ (4). As a shadow function, it is surprising that it develops much better than my Fi that I assume is in stage 2 (âWe accept and follow a social/cultural version of the function, or we passively follow the functional process; we are in its grip; its use is rigid or adolescentâ). This is plausible because my mom as a dominant Fe user canât teach me about how to use Fi nicely because she doesnât possess it (or maybe dismissing it).
 Her Si, as parent function and the one which is visible exteriorly (by keeping things ânormalâ for those she loves â everyone) might has a role in making my dominant function Si. Because parent function tends to nurture people, therefore it becomes my dominant as I follow her guidance a lot.
I donât really remember how my dad used to teach me. But as I mentioned earlier, I assume he was an INTJ. I deduce thereâs where I âgainâ my Te but Iâm not really sure. He did show me much of his Te, due to his parent function and he taught me about leadership, managing things, etc. But the Te doesnât get too dominant, maybe due to lack of exposure from him after he passed away and my mom has the main role of educating their children since the beginning.
So, how does your parentâs personality affect yours?
Resources for further readings:
1. Â Â Â Â Brand S, Hatzinger M, Beck J, Holsboer-Trachsler E. Perceived parenting styles, personality traits and sleep patterns in adolescents. Journal of Adolescence. 2009;32(5):1189-207.
2. Â Â Â Â de Haan AD, Prinzie P, Dekovic M. How and why children change in aggression and delinquency from childhood to adolescence: moderation of overreactive parenting by child personality. Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines. 2010;51(6):725-33.
3. Â Â Â Â Beebe J. Type and Archetype Part Two: The Arms and Their Shadow. Typeface. 2007;18:22-7.
4. Â Â Â Â Nardi D. A Fresh Understanding of Function Development 2003 [Available from: http://www.darionardi.com/functions.html.














