User Tag List

First 89101112 Last

Results 91 to 100 of 134

  1. #91
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    ^ tell me then, explicitly, what you find critical and unpleasant.
    A response like the one I just quoted.

    I can't get into your perspective enough to understand what you meant, so I'm left with only how I perceived the exchange:

    Morgan gave you a few paragraphs, and bolded a few items.

    A one-line response like this comes off as "Yeah, well, prove it!" rather than as a serious request, from the way I process things. If someone complains about me, I go back and reread and try to figure out what they meant, and then I ask them what they meant, and mention some things they might have meant.

    You didn't seem to invest in responding to her answer -- you didn't address what she DID say, nor did you add anything. You just demanded more proof. It's the same response someone gives when they're basically saying, "Screw off, you're wrong." A little investment in her response would have showed openness, but I couldn't see it in a comment like this.

    As has been said, if you are being sincere, this is a communication breakdown -- we can't read each other -- and I left a few days ago because the communication barrier seems too hard to overcome in this context. I'm rather stymied.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  2. #92
    reborn PeaceBaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    937 so/sx
    Posts
    6,226

    Default

    There's nothing I don't communicate here that's NOT sincere.

    Frankly, to me it's a given.

    I'm not asking her to prove anything. I truly want to know what I said in thread that is perceived as hostile, critical or unpleasant. I want to understand this, so I asked.

    I would not use the word hostile lightly for example. It's a huge word to me.

    I know some of this is the classic NT / NF disconnect, but if you read anything other than sincerity into my words, then you've gone somewhere else beyond my intention.
    "Remember always that you not only have the right to be an individual, you have an obligation to be one."
    Eleanor Roosevelt


    "When people see some things as beautiful,
    other things become ugly.
    When people see some things as good,
    other things become bad."
    Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching

  3. #93
    meh Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    FWIW, PB, I don't doubt your sincerity at all.
    I feel like you're getting upset and I don't have the insight to understand why, so I'm assuming some kind of transference thing is going on. Obviously, something personal prompted you to start this thread but you haven't shared what it is. What you have shared are your misgivings about a group of people who test/interact in a certain way. You do want to understand, but your misgivings are getting in the way of that (or so it seems to me).
    Going back to the OP:
    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    I am looking for some insight into what you think the major pulls / obstacles and misreads would be between the following variant types:

    so/sp with sx/sp
    The entire thread is an excellent example of the sort of "misreads" that occur - though I'm not sure if we have achieved insight or just followed a pattern...
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  4. #94
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    There's nothing I don't communicate here that's NOT sincere.

    Frankly, to me it's a given.

    I'm not asking her to prove anything. I truly want to know what I said in thread that is perceived as hostile, critical or unpleasant. I want to understand this, so I asked.

    I would not use the word hostile lightly for example. It's a huge word to me.

    I know some of this is the classic NT / NF disconnect, but if you read anything other than sincerity into my words, then you've gone somewhere else beyond my intention.

    I don't know if it's NT/NF.

    People call me a meld of the two, and I have enough NF friends where this sort of disconnect doesn't regularly happen. It's only with you and a few others that it shows up. So I don't understand it and cannot figure it out.

    Let's look at this very last exchange: Do you understand why I even read your last line as hostile? You asked what was hostile, I said, "This line" -- I kept it confined to one particular line, rather than overcomplicating it with having to spend lots of time to dig through your posts, repeat all the hostile-seeming lines, explaining the context of them (so as to accurate frame the communication)...

    ... and your response was (in a nutshell), "It wasn't hostile, and if you thought it was, you were incorrect because I never mean to be hostile."

    Do you see where you asked a question, I gave you one scrap to deal with, and you dismissed it? I don't think I want to invest an hour to make a strong case for my viewpoint and have you do the exact same thing to it; it's not worth it. I think my communication with my NF friends I don't have an issue with, they actually address the point with something as simple as, "That wasn't what I meant, but I see why you might have read it like that, I was kind of unclear," and then they rephrase it a better way; and I do the same with them.

    I believe what people do, regardless of what they say. You said one thing, but did another; I can't avoid but note the discrepancy, it's glaring to me and makes it difficult for me to just go with your words. Your tone just seems different.

    EDIT: I don't know if this is even an SO/SX issue anymore, I'm sorry if this has taken things on a tangent, and we can pull it back on track if we want.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  5. #95
    reborn PeaceBaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    937 so/sx
    Posts
    6,226

    Default

    As an SO-dom, I do feel like the ongoing part of a relationship is not as important to some people in my life as it is to others. I was interested to see if that could be defined by this whole SX - SO thing.

    Morgan, yes I am feeling frustrated at being misread, and the bolded lines that you pointed out reflect that. It truly is important to me to know what you see as hostile though, because I truly am not seeing it. Hostile is such a huge, horrible word, and it bespeaks a relationship of enmity, not allies. If I am missing such a huge thing, I would embrace you pointing it out to me, in order that I might grow.

    Jennifer, all I can do is tell you that every time you have "read" my intention, both here and in past threads, you have been incorrect. Plain as that. I'm not sure what emotional overlay you are plopping on my writing, but something is there beyond my words and I cannot understand the origin; only you can.

    My sentence to Morgan was succinct and delivered such that I could address each and every point to hopefully assure her I was not trying to insult her or anyone here. To reestablish rapport. The emotional context read in is unwarranted and unfair IMO; perhaps I too would have appreciated receiving the benefit of the doubt and a clarifying question myself before being judged.

    -----

    Let's do a breakdown on one of the issues in this thread:

    The thread started to go to downhill (with both Jennifer and Morgan) when I said this:

    Is sx just about the hit, the high? That's the part I don't want to give you because I feel like I'll give over and then you'll be gone. Very similar to a sexual one-night stand metaphor. I don't like the sense of being "used" and I feel like if you liked me enough to have sex with me and be intimate with me what is it that makes you leave me?
    I knew it was risky to put this paragraph out there. It doesn't "sound" nice. I knew it could provoke a reaction. But I didn't soften it, because frankly, my posts are so nice sometimes they don't even get attention at all. And, I wasn't sure what the edge of SX was ... is that connection so addicting, so compelling, it could compare to these extremes.

    Morgan's response was one I knew could happen but hoped would not: "I resent being compared to someone out looking for a one-night-stand or a drug-hit. You realize that you are accusing SXs of the same shallowness that you rankled against on behalf of SOs?"

    Let's examine this critically; if you re-read my paragraph again, I didn't accuse anyone of anything. They are simply questions. The common response is to say, "nah, it's not like that PB" or "yes it is!" (The intense words that jump out at me are in italics; they speak to a strong emotional reaction from the writer, but I know NT's often dismiss that they are using the words to reflect any emotional effect. So I ignored that part.)

    To me however, Morgan's reaction is an egregious leap of emotional interpretation, although not entirely unexpected. Again, let's be clear: My paragraph and Morgan's paragraph are not equal to each other. At all.

    Now, having received Morgan's reply, I am put on the spot to assure her I didn't want her to think I meant this literally, even though in the same post, only 2 sentences later than my quote above:

    PS I am being a bit harsh and a little unvarnished ...
    I pushed the boundaries of metaphor to ask my questions. Metaphor isn't LITERAL. Yet I am literally interpreted then placed on the defensive as some kind of hypocrite. Even with a disclaimer readily available to help frame the context so I wouldn't end up being thus interpreted.

    Morgan, upon examination can you concede that yours is the incorrect conclusion to draw given the circumstances and disclaimers present?

    (FWIW, no other SX-dom in thread has reacted as Jennifer and Morgan have. Which is also curious to me. The only commonality I see is gender.)

    -----

    Here's the crux:

    I sense I am pissing people off. So I try to explain myself, to assert the sincerity of my intentions but still I feel misunderstood, I get defensive, shake off that inner frustration, and try again to be understood.

    Sigh.

    -----

    At any rate, who knows if posting this is any help at all or a giant FAIL. But, at least this thread has helped me understand some aspects of the SX dynamic better, and see some differences between type as to what constitutes "deep" information.

    And if anyone wants to do a thorough dissection of all the disconnects, be my guest as I would love to see where my blind-spots are too.
    "Remember always that you not only have the right to be an individual, you have an obligation to be one."
    Eleanor Roosevelt


    "When people see some things as beautiful,
    other things become ugly.
    When people see some things as good,
    other things become bad."
    Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching

  6. #96
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rebe View Post
    Hey, that's very interesting the distinction you made between Fe dom and aux and Fi dom and aux in regards to expressing feelings.
    That part really leaped out at me as well.

    I've seen the Fe in action -- it usually overlays some sort of social formality / clarification of things (as an externalized judging function), and the person basically is determining where the interation goes.

    Note that it could also be J/P. Fi necessarily is attached to Pe. Pe is organic and accepts input -- it tries to feel its way through things rather than dictating where things should or must or should not or must not go. I remember many romantic relationships with Je types where I felt they were overlaying a particular plan on the relationship rather than just responding to what is happening.


    My fe aux friend tells me I am very confusing to guys all the time. Part of it is that we, Fi types, want to be absolutely sure we have feelings. Perhaps we know that the situation won't change so we try to stuff our feelings in, but eventually, the feelings has deepened and it needs to come out and reach some sort of resolution. I don't know how I might ... prevent that ... I won't say anything until I am 'certain' I have 'true' feelings but I won't be 'certain' until my feelings are so strong that there's not much I or the other person can do to 'resolve' it peacefully. You know what I mean? I think we are more all or nothing ... When it gets to that stage, it's either you win all or lose all in the relationship, that's that.
    I think it actually is that way. You feel your way through stuff, and when it's there, then it's already there. Je people typically tell their feelings where to go -- the outcome is already decided, and so the internal feelings are ignored or aren't given the leeway to "push someone." They are very apt to declare their intent up front. Pe people tend to declare their intent only after they figure it out, and the process is unfolding.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  7. #97
    Habitual Fi LineStepper JocktheMotie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    8,193

    Default

    This was in the other Sx thread and I think you might like it, as it reiterates that every instinct is drawn to one on one interaction, but with Sx there's just more of a focus, almost a compulsion.

    Quote Originally Posted by neptunesnet View Post
    This excerpt is from the enneagram institute website and I thought some of you might find it interesting. It's possibly why so many identify as being sexual when they are not:

    Sexual (aka "Attraction") Instinct

    Many people originally identify themselves as this type because they have learned that the Sexual types are interested in "one-on-one relationships." But all three instinctual types are interested in one-on-one relationships for different reasons, so this does not distinguish them. The key element in Sexual types is an intense drive for intimacy and a constant awareness of the "chemistry" between themselves and others. Sexual types are immediately aware of the attraction, or lack thereof, between themselves and other people. Further, while the basis of this instinct is related to sexuality, it is not necessarily about people engaging in the sexual act. There are many people that we are excited to be around for reasons of personal chemistry that we have no intention of "getting involved with." Nonetheless, we might be aware that we feel stimulated in certain people's company and less so in others. The sexual type is constantly moving toward that sense of intense stimulation and intimacy in their relationships and in their activities. They are the most "energized" of the three instinctual types, and tend to be more aggressive, competitive, charged, and emotionally intense than the Self-Pres or Social types. Sexual types need to have deep intimacy in their primary relationships or else they remain unsatisfied. They enjoy being intensely involved—even merged—with others, and can become disenchanted with partners who are unable to meet their need for intense energetic union. Losing yourself in a "fusion" of being is the ideal here, and Sexual types are always looking for this state with others and with stimulating objects in their world.
    I also bolded the last bit because I don't think my Sx-ness only manifests itself with people, but it's an overwhelming attitude I have towards objects that intrigue me in general.



  8. #98
    meh Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    ^Yes. It's really just about focus and passion, more than anything else.
    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    Morgan, yes I am feeling frustrated at being misread, and the bolded lines that you pointed out reflect that. It truly is important to me to know what you see as hostile though, because I truly am not seeing it. Hostile is such a huge, horrible word, and it bespeaks a relationship of enmity, not allies. If I am missing such a huge thing, I would embrace you pointing it out to me, in order that I might grow.
    ...
    The emotional context read in is unwarranted and unfair IMO; perhaps I too would have appreciated receiving the benefit of the doubt and a clarifying question myself before being judged.
    In what way have you been judged? I (correctly) interpreted that you were getting upset. So did Jen, which is why she backed off.

    Hostile doesn't carry the emotional weight for me that it seems to for you. If I perceived that kind of enmity, I wouldn't bother to engage you, so .

    I knew it was risky to put this paragraph out there. It doesn't "sound" nice. I knew it could provoke a reaction. But I didn't soften it, because frankly, my posts are so nice sometimes they don't even get attention at all.
    So you wanted to provoke a reaction, but when you got that reaction you're not happy about it. This doesn't make sense to me. Like I said, I resent the accusations of emotional promiscuity/"vampirism" that have been leveled at SXs in recent days/weeks and feel the need to challenge them. It's a character sleight. That doesn't mean I resent you. Can you see the distinction? That's why I sought to clarify.

    (The intense words that jump out at me are in italics; they speak to a strong emotional reaction from the writer, but I know NT's often dismiss that they are using the words to reflect any emotional effect. So I ignored that part.)
    Yeah...but no. I really don't know you well enough to have any kind of emotional reaction to anything you say, let alone a strong one.

    I pushed the boundaries of metaphor to ask my questions. Metaphor isn't LITERAL. Yet I am literally interpreted then placed on the defensive as some kind of hypocrite. Even with a disclaimer readily available to help frame the context so I wouldn't end up being thus interpreted.

    Morgan, upon examination can you concede that yours is the incorrect conclusion to draw given the circumstances and disclaimers present?
    Not really, no.

    The thing is, I have only responded (dispassionately) to what you have actually said/asked:
    There's this sense that sx is about getting sx needs met, but seldom is the other person mentioned
    ...
    Is sx just about the hit, the high? That's the part I don't want to give you because I feel like I'll give over and then you'll be gone. Very similar to a sexual one-night stand metaphor. I don't like the sense of being "used" and I feel like if you liked me enough to have sex with me and be intimate with me what is it that makes you leave me?
    ...
    I resent that I'm not important enough to warrant anything more than a cursory inspection to see if I am willing to get there "fast".
    ...
    Why does an sx-dom think anyone should? What have you done to "earn" that level of intimacy?
    Whereas, throughout the thread, you seem to be reading stuff that simply isn't there - implicitly or explicitly:
    For example:
    To suggest that "so" is a "stay superficial" orientation is kind of insulting, really.
    So you do a door-slam, minimize/dismiss the material that offended you by reading in an interpretation or intention that did not exist, then toss a passive-aggressive comment out saying "I'm finished here."
    And your (unfounded?) assumption that the people who "come and go" in your life are SXs:
    I feel like they get their high off of me, and then when they get what they wanted they move on. I wanted to be friends. I thought they liked me. But, they wanted to explore me and taste a bit and move on. But I wanted more! I find that ironic somehow, when the sx is supposed to be all about "depth".
    You think SXs are "being socially inappropriate when they move fast".

    I think someone will "take" something from me and then never maintain that friendship over time. This has been a pattern IRL; I make friends with relative ease, but I can feel some want my energy and when I am "figured out" (so to speak) they move on. Not everyone, but enough for me to notice a trend.
    A trend that marks these people who have "taken something from you" as SX, apparently. Hence this thread requesting that SXs justify their "socially inappropriate" behaviour.

    Who do you think is jumping to judgments/conclusions, really...?

    Again, I'm not offended in the least by anything you've said. Even the unsolicited advice. That doesn't mean I have to agree with it. We are coming at this with very different sets of values and assumptions and perhaps we'll never be able to understand the other's perspective, but we should aim to respect it, at least.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  9. #99
    Senior Member INTPness's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    2,158

    Default

    ^Morgan said it's about "focus and passion". So true. It energizes us. It's such a great feeling to be in that "zone" with someone. And the intense focus is probably why other types feel "zoomed in on", as someone mentioned. In really intense connections, it's sometimes as if the other person and I are the only ones who exist at that moment. Nothing that's going on around us even gets noticed or paid attention to.

    I remember sitting in a car with a date one time - it was probably like 9pm and there was a park next to us with lots of people in it. We had that intense connection in our conversation. Next thing you know, 2 cops come up next to us and say, "what are you guys doing here?" "uhhh, just talking, why?" "It's midnight, the park has been closed for an hour, and you're in a no parking zone. Didn't you notice any of those things?"

    LOL. Sorry Ocifer, but no I didn't.
    NTJ's are the only types that have ever made me feel emo.
    ENP's are the only types that have ever made me feel like a sensor.


    There are two great days in a person's life - the day we are born and the day we discover why. --William Barclay

  10. #100
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JocktheMotie View Post
    I also bolded the last bit because I don't think my Sx-ness only manifests itself with people, but it's an overwhelming attitude I have towards objects that intrigue me in general.
    I posted something earlier in the other thread about how I think this SX description actually applies to artistic experience for me (vs things that people call art but typically have hold no interest to my mind).

    http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...ml#post1242165
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

Similar Threads

  1. [so] so/sp vs. so/sx 4
    By thoughtlost in forum Instinctual Subtypes
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 12-13-2017, 09:09 PM
  2. [sp] Sp/So: experiences with other types
    By decrescendo in forum Instinctual Subtypes
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-26-2014, 04:29 PM
  3. sp/so, so/sp, and sp/sx exxp
    By the state i am in in forum Enneagram
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 10-23-2010, 08:12 PM
  4. [INTJ] INTJs interacting with others
    By Natrushka in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 10-20-2007, 04:30 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO