User Tag List

View Poll Results: What's your instinctual stacking?

Voters
139. You may not vote on this poll
  • sx/so

    18 12.95%
  • sx/sp

    31 22.30%
  • so/sx

    23 16.55%
  • so/sp

    12 8.63%
  • sp/sx

    29 20.86%
  • sp/so

    26 18.71%
First 34567 Last

Results 41 to 50 of 95

  1. #41
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    868

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Speed Gavroche View Post
    They are the least common. It's just that a lor of people here probably mistype themselves.



    Yes. And also, many confuse being Sx with "love" "emo" or something, and there's a lot of F on this board.



    They are often like that. We can't deny it. But that doesn't mean that a lot of people here can be of theses stackings.



    Yes.

    Though, for Sx, I think is true to say that a lot of Sx people have a strong sexual presence and attraction, even when they are ugly. It's just that a lot of people here are like "I know i'm not intense and sexual, but I'am very romantic and I really, really want a relationship, so I'am Sx" or something. That's in part why a lot of people believe they are Sx while they are not.


    I think the results are biased by the currents values among internet users, especially the NF ones, and how they can see ach instinct based on that. Sp= individualistic (that's me!), Sx= romantic (that's me!) So= attention whore (groooss!).

    I'm a bit reluctant at taking that as an accurate way for typing.
    This is a great post. The bolded is especially right on, though I don't disagree with any of it.

  2. #42
    Anew Leaf
    Guest

    Default

    I relate the most to SX first and SP a strong second.

  3. #43
    Shaman BlackCat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ESFP
    Enneagram
    9w8 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    7,004

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    I thought sp and so were supposed to be the more common variants?

    No wonder this place feels like such a sex pot...
    Real life != this forum...
    () 9w8-3w4-7w6 tritype.

    sCueI (primary Inquisition)

  4. #44
    Shaman BlackCat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ESFP
    Enneagram
    9w8 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    7,004

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    I thought sp and so were supposed to be the more common variants?

    No wonder this place feels like such a sex pot...
    Real life != this forum...
    () 9w8-3w4-7w6 tritype.

    sCueI (primary Inquisition)

  5. #45
    i love skylights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 so/sx
    Socionics
    EII Ne
    Posts
    7,835

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mia. View Post
    It's entirely possible that the interweb is overrepresented by those with I, N, and sx preferences.
    yeah.

    it's hard to sort out what you are with the bias. it took me a long time to figure out i was sx/so instead of so/sx because i don't consider myself highly "sexual". but in terms of instinctual variant i am much more sx than so.

  6. #46
    Sugar Hiccup OrangeAppled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEI Ni
    Posts
    7,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Speed Gavroche View Post
    They are the least common. It's just that a lor of people here probably mistype themselves.
    Because....?

    Yes. And also, many confuse being Sx with "love" "emo" or something, and there's a lot of F on this board.
    I think the draw to sx is the idea of being sexy & attractive, not "romantic". Many people have a bravado about their own sexuality. Just like few people think they are of average intelligence & few think they are of average looks, few think they have average libidos. Then, they confuse sexuality with sx. Much enneagram literature notes that when an instinct is your dom type, you can also have the most problems with it. Sx-dom can have intimacy and sexual hang-up issues, just as SPs can be ascetics & SOs can be painfully shy & withdrawn.

    I think Naranjo (?) sometimes calls sx the "one-to-one" instinct, which seems less likely to cause confusion with "sexiness" (but it also doesn't describe the side that is not about people, but experiences).

    I think a lot of sx are so-dom.... sure, they're attractive, impressive, and have a certain kind of intensity, but they don't have the "one-to-one" factor. They draw audiences, not individuals in an intimate way (and I don't mean "romance"). Not that I think sx is oh so rare (because I challenge that notion too), but it definitely seems suspiciously over-represented.

    They are often like that. We can't deny it. But that doesn't mean that a lot of people here can be of theses stackings.
    I don't think those terms are the fair way to describe their "vibe". Some of the descriptions use terms like "cerebral" or "intellectual", and I think that's much more fair. In contrast, sx-dom may seem less cerebral or intellectual, which can't be denied either . Attraction is going to be more about what is appealing to individuals, and some people may prefer the so/sp or sp/so vibe to the sx one, especially if they themselves are sx last.

    Though, for Sx, I think is true to say that a lot of Sx people have a strong sexual presence and attraction, even when they are ugly. It's just that a lot of people here are like "I know i'm not intense and sexual, but I'am very romantic and I really, really want a relationship, so I'am Sx" or something. That's in part why a lot of people believe they are Sx while they are not.
    Strong presence, yes; attraction, no. I think this is an sx seeing sx through their sx bias . I think sx types incur STRONG REACTIONS, but that can also include REPULSION. I'm pretty sure I've seen this noted in enneagram literature too.... That makes sense, as there's a "weeding out of people", whereas SO types are more like "the more, the merrier" or they're mortified to be noticed much at all.

    I'm going to reference @brainheart 's analogy of the instincts to bouncing balls... the first has the highest, second the middle, and last the lowest bounce. This shows how the dominant has a greater range, with the strengths & the problematic areas being more apparent. The last shows the least range, making it less strong in a positive way, but often less problematic too.

    I think a lot of sp/so and so/sp probably choose a mate quietly & settle down contentedly (which might look dull to some), whereas an sx may find things a lot more stormy in their relationships.

    I think the results are biased by the currents values among internet users, especially the NF ones, and how they can see ach instinct based on that. Sp= individualistic (that's me!), Sx= romantic (that's me!) So= attention whore (groooss!).

    I'm a bit reluctant at taking that as an accurate way for typing.
    Mostly true, but it's not just NFs. I think most people like to imagine they are individualistic & not attention whores. I explained what I think the appeal of sx is to most...
    Often a star was waiting for you to notice it. A wave rolled toward you out of the distant past, or as you walked under an open window, a violin yielded itself to your hearing. All this was mission. But could you accomplish it? (Rilke)

    INFP | 4w5 sp/sx | RLUEI - Primary Inquisitive | Tritype is tripe

  7. #47
    mod love baby... Lady_X's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    9w1 sx/so
    Posts
    18,086

    Default

    i think speed definitely confuses sx with sex-yness way too much
    maybe others do too but i hear him saying it more than most

    i agree that sx dom people can have intimacy issues...i do...i can't explain it but i feel intimacy so much...that i have issues
    i just told my bf today at lunch that i felt soul raped by someones eye contact the other day
    my barriers seem thin compared to most

    this way of being doesn't seem to have much to do with sex
    it is just an intense intimacy...and constant awareness of that connection between yourself and others.
    There can’t be any large-scale revolution until there’s a personal revolution, on an individual level. It’s got to happen inside first.
    -Jim Morrison

  8. #48
    Senior Member Winds of Thor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    1,859

    Default

    3 Sexual/Social
    The focus of this subtype is less on material gain. The basic fear for this type is loss of intimate love. The sex/soc subtype, like the sex/self-pres, lacks trust in their intimates. Because they feel unworthy of true love, they don’t believe that anyone can love them solely for themselves. Therefore, they continuously strive to hold onto their intimates’ admiration, deluding themselves that if they are admired, they may become worthy of love. They do this through vigorous maintenance of their appearance, achievements, etc. Ageing is often especially difficult for this subtype.

    This insecurity leads to an incessant need for reassurance from intimates, in the form of words of affirmation or time spent together (to the exclusion of others). This insatiable need often leads to intense jealousy, which only serves to distance others from them, thus erroneously affirming the Three's basic fear that they are unworthy of true love. While they share a lot with the sex/self-pres Three, the secondary social instinct adds an element of competition when it comes to questions of desirability. This subtype likes to be seen as the alpha male or alpha female.

    When the sex/soc is healthier, they realize this competition is self-defeating. They can take comfort in the thought that another person’s success and attention do not take away their worth in any way.
    "..And the eight and final rule: If this is your first time at Fight Club, you have to fight."
    'Men are meant to be with women. The rest is perversion and mental illness.'

  9. #49
    FRACTALICIOUS phobik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    7,368

    Default

    last time I tested got sx/sp
    To avoid criticism, do nothing, say nothing, be nothing.
    ~ Elbert Hubbard

    Music provides one of the clearest examples of a much deeper relation between mathematics and human experience.

  10. #50
    Honor Thy Inferior Such Irony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INtp
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    5,091

    Default

    I think I'm this:

    sp/so weakside (strong soc) - draws from so/sx to produce what is overall a lighter, friendlier, and more humor employing style within self pres (though funny through conscious effort and without much irony, unlike strongsiders who are relatively less aware of how they're perceived). can seem more sociable than many so/sp's, and better embodying of a common touch. a notable degree of social consciousness tempers their more private security seeking instinct, so not surprisingly weaksiders can seem soc first, often with a certain generous or self sacrificial quality. the self deprecator, the sidekick, the philanthropist. james dobson, dan rather, david letterman, rush limbaugh, steven spielberg, al franken, don rickles, woody allen, ray romano, michael moore, jerry brown, charles barkley. fictionals: charlie brown, piglet, mr tumnus, threepio.


    Where are all the sp/so on the forum? Stand proud.

    SX is overrated.
    INtp
    5w6 or 9w1 sp/so/sx, I think
    Ravenclaw/Hufflepuff
    Neutral Good
    LII-Ne




Similar Threads

  1. [Inst] Your social relationships & instinctual stacking
    By OrangeAppled in forum Instinctual Subtypes
    Replies: 81
    Last Post: 03-26-2015, 09:17 PM
  2. What would be this girl's instinctual stacking?
    By badger055 in forum Enneagram
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 12-02-2014, 08:49 PM
  3. [Inst] Write a description of your instinctual stacking based off your own experience
    By badger055 in forum Instinctual Subtypes
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 03-30-2014, 05:18 PM
  4. What's your instinctual stacking?
    By Entropic in forum Instinctual Subtypes
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 03-22-2013, 01:27 PM
  5. Replies: 20
    Last Post: 01-06-2012, 06:58 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