The INFJ door-slam explained

There has been much discussion on the web of the so-called INFJ doorslam.
For those unfamiliar with the term, it refers to the INFJs seemingly abrupt severing of all contact with an acquaintance, friend or partner. Blog posts and Youtube videos abound with varying analysis as to why this phenomenon occurs, often by those that have been on the receiving end. So what’s it all about?

The catalyst for the doorslam will vary, but usually involves a sense of their having been deliberately hurt, under appreciated or taken for granted.
Experiencing these feelings is of course, common to all personality types.

So to understand why this ‘doorslam’ response is peculiar to INFJ, we must understand their particular needs and approach to relationships.
INFJs are cautious, considered individuals. They are acutely aware of the fact that human interaction can be kryptonite for them, and orchestrate their lives in such a way as to limit their exposure to potential conflict, humiliation or any feeling of being trapped or cornered.
With this in mind, it must be understood that INFJs will ‘leave the door ajar’ in all relationships no matter how casual or close they may be.

The fundamental ‘modus vivendi’ of the INFJ is to retain the ability to walk away.
It must therefore be understood, that this requirement will be a component of every decision the INFJ makes. Without exception.
Naturally, when spelled out in these terms, other personality types will interpret this fact as an unwillingness or an inability to ‘commit’. This would appear logical, but in fact INFJs are also renowned for being particularly loyal in their relationships.

This then, would appear paradoxical. In fact, it is entirely rational.

INFJs, in spite of their lofty, idealistic philosophising and romantic, chivalric inclinations are, in the final analysis realists. They understand that when we strip away the veneer, life is primarily about surviving.
And as has been said, for INFJ, that means avoiding embarrassing, uncomfortable social interactions.

They are therefore, just as inclined to commit to a relationship as anyone else.
What they are not however inclined to do, is to embark upon a fatiguing charade of ‘amicable acquaintance’ when a relationship has run its course.