• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Multiple Enneagram Subtypes/Instincts The seduction styles of various enneagram variant combos

0

011235813

Guest
She had a really fucked up life and is very schizoid.

Enneagram types do develop as a consequence of personal traumas though. They're basically different kinds of deficiencies and defense mechanisms.

I haven't watched the American movie. I read the book and watched the Swedish version. Rooney Mara does have a very soft presence in her interviews and I could buy a 9-fix for her, so yeah. Still not sold on 9 for Lisbeth Salander though.
 

Burger King

New member
Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
338
Enneagram types do develop as a consequence of personal traumas though. They're basically different kinds of deficiencies and defense mechanisms.

That's debatable. If that's the case, do you think it's possible for someone in their late 30's to change enneagram type due to trauma? Or perhaps you see this as something happening at an early time in a person's life, with a short window for change? Like learning languages. Btw, I've heard all sorts of arguments and theories over how enneagram types are developed. Some say external circumstances and influences. Others say in-born, or in-utero experience.
 
0

011235813

Guest
That's debatable. If that's the case, do you think it's possible for someone in their late 30's to change enneagram type because of trauma? Or perhaps you see this as something happening at an early time in a person's life, with a short window for change? Like learning languages. Might explain why some propose you should hold off on type (both typing others and typing oneself) until after a certain age. Btw, I've heard all sorts of arguments and theories over how enneagram types are developed. Some say external circumstances and influences. Others say in-born, or in-utero experience.

Naranjo attributes it to childhood developmental experiences, which makes a lot of sense to me.
 

Entropic

New member
Joined
Aug 20, 2012
Messages
1,200
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
8w9
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
I agree with your typing of her as core 5 and 4w3 image fix. Instincts is debatable, as I can see her as sp/sx too. But why 5w4? I always see her get thrown in the w6 camp (she does seem to have a phobic/counterphobic orientation).

Because her focus seems to be that of self-expression, to find out the truth about herself, to understand the world through herself.
I still see her having a 9 gut fix. The 8 stuff comes from the 5 line to 8. I always saw 8 fixers as having a rather comfortable and expansive vibe.

And do you think that applies to me as well? My tritype is in my signature. I don't see her as a 9 fix, because 9 fixers have this narcotic and avoidant self-expression to them, even if core 5s. Again, type 5s aren't motivationally concerned about vengeance/lust-themes. The connetion to 8 doesn't work that way.
Edit: I have rage and sadism too. And lust and vengeance. I'm not an 8-fixer. Oh wait I am, actually an 8 core with 8 wing. But seriously, I have those things, and have done stuff in the name of those things that I am not particularly proud of. I'm no 8 fixer.
Your point...? You rather reinforce my argument.


Also, [MENTION=13147]senza tema[/MENTION] summarized it well as well:

5s integrate to 8, which implies healthy behavior, I think. Salander's moments of rage and sadism are very, very far from healthy.

I think what Loki is arguing for here is a severe misunderstanding of how 5 moves towards 8 during both levels of health and unhealth.

As for the American film, I could see Rooney Mara as a 9-fixer too. She does have a much softer demeanor to her. I fell asleep watching it though, and I never bothered to finish it. I got rather annoyed how it attempted to come across as authentic e.g. you see Craig smoking in a coffee shop. No, just no. Smoking inside any building is prohibited in Sweden. So much for authenticity.

Regardless, I definitely see Salander as 584 or 583. Can't see 6 core. She's avaricious, not suffering from cowardice. Her focus is on self-benefits, how she can survive in a world that is dangerous (yes, I would argue that type 5 is a rather selfish type due to having connections to both 7 and 8, being id types), not about seeking community or faith in authority. If anything I see her strongly rejecting both of those attributes, which also speaks against a 6 wing.
 

Entropic

New member
Joined
Aug 20, 2012
Messages
1,200
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
8w9
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
This doesn't tell me much. Actually, it can go the w6 direction depending on how you interpret it. Speaking of severe misunderstandings, what's particularly 4-ish about this? Enlighten my severe misunderstanding.

w6 focuses more on understanding world through the outside, through structure and authority. The primary information isn't about understanding oneself, and the focus of anxiety doesn't come from not knowing oneself or who one is. Now granted, I haven't read the books but I have seen the Swedish films and from what I remember of her, I never saw anything I thought vibed as particularly 6-like.

Probably to you a useless comparison but she is extremely similar to Hei from Darker Than Black in this regard, albeit different in their own ways. Darker Than Black is, I should add, also a mystery series, and Hei is as a whole, extremely intent to find the truth. Both 5s and 6s care about truth, but the question becomes what truth is. The one who really is the 6 in the Millennium series is if anything, Blomkvist, not Salander. He's the one who finds himself feeling framed, he's the one who sees government conspiracies and he's the one intent unveiling the grand truth to show how corrupt authority is and so on. Salander just seems to get along with Blomkvist almost for the sake of it being fun. I just don't see her actually being genuinely concerned about the truths Blomkvist is concerned about.

The reason why I am comparing Salander to Hei is because Hei is most likely a 5w4 but I can see why people could mistake him for a 5w6 because he gets dragged into power struggles between various sources of authority and could be mistaken as appearing counter-phobic because of the ISFP-ness. Now, however, a character who I think is a 5 and a 5w6 is Fox Mulder. His thinking and focus is so much more extroverted. He is going to find out the truth about the world out there, rather than the world inside of yourself. I just never saw that kind of drive in Salander. The quote that you mention below even focuses on how the tattoos are a means of self-expression, and that alone suggests a strong connection to the image triad.

She was incredibly counterphobic and even the theme for the series is 6-ish in nature. The mystery genre, uncovering "truths," whistle blowing, anti-authoritarian style gives it away. What I get with 6 (and 6 fixers) is a sort of skepticism and testing of ideas, culture, people, in a perhaps, a subconscious effort to maintain a stable foundation, one that can be trusted. There was a thread here that gave a good overview on identifying certain fixes. I ripped it off from that as it makes sense from my experience and observation. You get this with the average 6 description too. I'm not arguing for anything new here either as I've seen others 5s acknowledge the counterphobic in her character... so much so that she doesn't even seem like 5 to some. Image fix be damned, even the way she looks speaks to a counterphobic 6 wing. A quick google and you get something like this:

Explain what 5s think she's a w6 to the point she seems like a 6. That as a whole doesn't mean a lot to me. A lot of people don't actually know what type 5 is, even less so how the wings for type 5 actually operate.
Tattoos

"Tattoos indicate both nonconformity and the individual’s assertion of power over the body. Salander’s tattoos mark her immediately as an unorthodox figure and always draw the attention of others. However, though Salander’s tattoos mark her as a nonconformist, they also indicate her control over her own body and her fierce self-possession. After her rape, Salander immediately goes and gets a tattoo: a slim band around her ankle. The act functions as a calculated assertion of her control over her own body. Likewise, the tattoo that she gives Bjurman indicates her control over his body and signifies Salander’s newfound power over him. Consequently, Bjurman too becomes marked as a social outsider, since the location of the tattoo and the nature of the words essentially cut him off from certain social interactions and reminds him consistently of Salander’s power over him."

Whoa, look at all the 6 buzzwords.

But this is an analysis of her character, not actually an extract from the book and her reasoning processes. Also, what 6 buzzwords? If anything, what I see here is logic reminiscent of Si from a point of Ne dominance (power over body), as well as a lot of 8-logic. I also see a strong argument here for 5, 8 and 4. I do however, not see anything pertaining to 6. I don't see anything mentioning insecurity, cowardice, fear, authority or anything of the sort.
I don't have any more energy. If you can't the 6 in her, then I got nothin'.

No, I can't. It would perhaps help explain what you think type 6 is for me to see why you think that way. I have a feeling that what you think is 6-ness is what I think is 8-ness.
 

The Great One

New member
Joined
Apr 27, 2012
Messages
3,439
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
6w7
Hm...I don't know, I haven't seen the movie. But the combination you suggested sounds reasonable. I'm not goth though. I only played around with it a bit in my youth.

Yeah most sx/sp are goth.

Also I could be wrong about the "Dragon Tattoo" lady. I only saw a small portion of the movie and had to turn it off. I found the rape scenes too tough to handle.
 

greenfairy

philosopher wood nymph
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
4,024
MBTI Type
iNfj
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Yeah most sx/sp are goth.

Also I could be wrong about the "Dragon Tattoo" lady. I only saw a small portion of the movie and had to turn it off. I found the rape scenes too tough to handle.
Yeah I definitely would. That's why I don't want to watch it.
 
B

brainheart

Guest
[MENTION=10496]skylights[/MENTION] :)

And then there is this in 16types: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/content.php/133-Instinctual-Stackings
Check section "Flow of Instinctual Energies & Compatibility":

Flow of Instinctual Energies & Compatibility

When we invest our energy, most of it is devoted to fulfillment of our primary instinct. The remaining energy radiates or flows onto the secondary instinct and finally onto the last instinct, which receives the smallest share. There are two possible configurations or directions for this flow. In first configuration, energy is invested in the order of sx→sp→so→sx. This direction gives rise to three stackings: sx/sp, sp/so, so/sx. In the second configuration, energy is invested in the order of sx→so→sp→sx, which gives rise to the other three stackings: sx/so, so/sp and sp/sx.

Syn-flow: sp → so → sx → sp
Stackings involved: sp/so → so/sx → sx/sp → sp/so
Direction: Compelled toward people. Acting upon and with others as a born insider i.e.- deeply human.

Contra-flow: sp → sx → so → sp
Stackings involved: sp/sx → sx/so → so/sp → sp/sx
Direction: Compelled against people. Seething belligerent outsiders; 'antisocial', provoking, reverse-flow change catalysts. In some profound sense, rejecting the human condition, their own and/or that of others.

The two flows move in the opposite directions. This antithesis can be seen if the instinctual stackings are compared in pairs:

so/sx - including, associating, affiliating, networking, incorporating, interconnecting, introducing, unifying, linking, bonding, annexing, cooperating, receiving
sx/so - excluding, eliminating, dividing, separating, contradicting, subverting, confronting, rebuffing, ridiculing, challenging, interrupting, reforming, rupturing

sx/sp - intensifying, escalating, rising, surging, enlivening, invigorating, accelerating, stimulating, energizing, vitalizing, reviving, animating, inspiriting
sp/sx - dulling, calming, quieting, grounding, descending, lowering, dampening, numbing, desensitizing, exhausting, deadening, extinguishing, making still

sp/so - conserving, protecting, maintaining, preserving, supplying, repairing, sustaining, stewarding
so/sp - utilizing, employing, implementing, expending, exercising, spending, capitalizing, expropriating

It has been proposed that people of stackings that are part of same flow progression generally have mutually reinforcing and supportive interactions as they are channeling their attention, efforts and energies in the same direction. The stacking located upstream within the flow progression has the ability to cover for the blindspot instinct of the downstream stacking, by this also reinforcing the energy flow of downstream stacking. For example: a person of sx/sp stacking is directing energy in the following manner sx→sp→so, in which case someone with sp/so stack can reinforce the sx/sp's weaker secondary sp→so link and support their social-last blindspot.

The relationship between people of downsteam and upstream stackings within the same flow can be compared to relations of Benefit or Supervision in Socionics i.e. they contain elements of asymmetry; partners seem to one another simultaneously talented in some way and also somehow lacking.

The individual of downstream stacking usually feels a measure of attraction for someone of their upstream stacking and attempt to get to know them. In they become close, the downstream stacking often attempts to provide for the upstream stacking through help and activities channeled through their secondary instinct (e.g. so/sx may try to draw out sx/sp out of their shell into the social sphere, by inviting them to partake in some social activities or introducing them to new people, sensing that sx/sp is too insular). The upstream stacking at the same time feels some kind of deficiency in the downstream stacking; this is reflected, first of all, in inflexible and overly emphatic focus on their primary instinct, which for downstream stacking, to the contrary, is an adaptive, flexible, creative area only of secondary importance; and secondly in lack of attention to their first instinct (e.g. sx/sp may feel like sp/so doesn't know how to creatively provide for their sp-needs and that sp/so is not emotionally lively enough for an sx-first). The upstream person, meanwhile, comes into awareness of downstream stacking's deficiency in their blindspot instinct which for upstream stacking serves as a creative area. If their relations are friendly, the upstream person will attempt to provide for the blindspot of the downstream person, guiding them away from committing mistakes and towards beneficial and constructive actions in this sphere (e.g. sx/sp will try to guide so/sx away from doing anything that may threaten their well-being, their health and livelihood, their self-preservation needs, and direct them towards greater sustainability and well-being). The downstream person is often reluctant about such help, since this is not something that they generally concern about, but at the same time feels inspired, uplifted, and invigorated by such blindspot support and infusion, since focus exerted on their blindspot instinct has the effect of alleviating the neuroses and insecurities related to their primary instinct fixation. If they are on unfriendly terms, the upstream stacking may openly chide, be critical and derisive of the weaknesses of downstream person in their last blindspot instinct, and look down on the downstream person for what they see as misguided and deficient orientation.

Relations between stackings of opposite flows may feel attractive initially due to their novelty and contrast. However, in the long run, the interaction may feel somewhat boring, unrewarding, uncomplimentary, disorienting, correcting, stifling, and otherwise frustrating to the people involved.

Relations between stackings of opposite flows with shared dominant instinct (e.g. sp/so-sp/sx, or sx/sp-sx/so) are usually most interesting and compelling at the initial stages. Both partners have the same primary drive and desire, which evokes mutual sympathy and respect. However, they soon discover that they tap into different spheres to try to fulfill this need due to differences in secondary instincts. Each will attempt to pull the other into the realm of their secondary instinct, but find that while the other person appreciates this invitation in at least for its novelty, they won't feel comfortable in this sphere and will retract, which at times will end in mutual reproaches and disagreements (e.g. sx/so complains that sx/sp is too insular, socially unaware and crude, while sx/sp will find fault with what they see as sx/so's social vassalage and disregard for privacy). It is as if both people agree on having to carry the same heavy load, but then end up pulling it into different directions, which evokes feelings of dissatisfaction and misunderstanding. Nevertheless, among the opposite flow interactions this pairing is usually the most attractive and frequently encountered one.

Stacking of same but mutually opposing instincts (e.g. sp/so and so/sp) often have overlapping areas of interests and concerns and same area of disinterest and disregard (same instinctual blindspot). They may appreciate what the other person brings into relationship in terms of content and feel camaraderie on basis of having the same blindspot instinct (e.g. sp/sx and sx/sp may appreciate each other's disregard for the social convention and "lone wolf" approach). However, partners seem somehow elusive to one another. What constitutes the primary drive, desire, and concern of one partner, the other approaches in a creative, flexible, light-hearted way as something that is only of secondary importance. Thus while inverse stackings can sense their similarity, at the same time they constantly unbalance and throw each other off. Since they are channeling their attention and energies in the opposite directions, they may enter a cycle of mutual correction, extinguishment, and reorientation, criticizing the other for what they see as a misguided focus. Both of them might feel as if they are constantly pulling the rug from under each other's feet.

Stackings that share the same middle instinct but not the leading one can be said to be most opposite in their orientation. If there is any attraction between people of these stackings, it usually forms on basis of overlap of areas that they approach flexibly and creatively due to having same middle instinct (e.g. sx/sp and so/sp may have involving discussion about fitness, home decor, and culinary topics). They soon discover, however, that their primary motivations and desires couldn't be any more different and are of no interest to each other, and thus part ways. In worst case scenarios, one of them will find the other disruptive of their primary orientation and try to eliminate or somehow suppress the other person.

I realized recently this is the wisest information about instinct relations that I've read.
 

Dancing_Queen

New member
Joined
Jul 18, 2013
Messages
128
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
8w7
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Even with making friends in school... I remember zeroing in on the people I felt super-drawn to... then infiltrating the group... using it as an excuse to get closer to them... using it as a vector, a vehicle... then once I was completely enmeshed in the group to the point that I was part of the group 100% of the time, so I could see that person 100% of the time they were present in the group, then I'd begin to draw that person away from the group into our new coupling... actually speaking of, I'm sort of doing that with someone right now. I mean... isn't this how everyone goes about making friends?

:unsure:

I didn't realize I was that creepy. :doh:

That's like, the story of my life. I did this in the past and never though anything of it, it was just so natural to me. People think 8w7 Sx/So are beasts who grab who they want by their hair, but I'm much more seductive and persuasive than forceful.

Damn :blush:
 

Comeback Girl

Ratchet Ass Moon Fairy
Joined
Jul 30, 2013
Messages
570
MBTI Type
ESFP
Enneagram
2w3
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
So/sx​

The social/sexual style of seduction also works through the group. However, many times they will want to seduce individuals through the usage of groups. Many times they will try to be liked by the group and win the admiration of the group, and then win the individual that they want to seduce that way. Also, they often enjoy a fairly small group to hang out with as well.

(Didn't know my instinctual type, did a test so I could tell if this works for me.)

This doesn't really work for me. Ever since the first time I wanted to seduce someone, groups have made the seduction process harder for me. People are very judgmental when it comes to seduction, I've never come across someone who had a positive opinion about me wanting to seduce someone. Whenever I'm in a group and I want to seduce someone, I have to resist to that temptation and hold myself in. It seems like other people only approve of my seduction choices when I want to seduce someone they picked for me (I never met a good match maker). So when it comes to seduction, I prefer doing it in situations where no one I know could witness it. Sometimes I'll even try to find excuses to meet up with someone one on one. I've never planned a murder, but I think that would feel the exact same way as planning to seduce someone (except for the sexual/romantic part). No, people and groups are the root of evil when it comes to seduction.
 

skylights

i love
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
7,756
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
That's like, the story of my life. I did this in the past and never though anything of it, it was just so natural to me. People think 8w7 Sx/So are beasts who grab who they want by their hair, but I'm much more seductive and persuasive than forceful.

Damn :blush:

:hifive:!



Given the new realization that I'm so/sx moreso than sx/so, I'd like to point out that I really echo @Comeback Girl's feelings about the so/sx description in terms of wanting to get away from the group. I mean, I love groups, but there's something "dirty" about overlapping the relationship and the group. It becomes harder because then you have to choose between what's best for your relationship and what's best for the group, so it's ideal to migrate the budding relationship out of the group ASAP. I also don't have any desire for the group to know how my relationship is progressing unless it's information I've sanctioned for group knowledge, since the relationship is more intimate than the group relationship. I just don't want that tension there - much later, when we're an established couple, the relationship-in-group situation can re-emerge with much more comfort, since we are a stable unit (and what's better than having your partner and your family around?!), but until that, I prefer to keep them separate.
 

Dancing_Queen

New member
Joined
Jul 18, 2013
Messages
128
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
8w7
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
:hifive:!



Given the new realization that I'm so/sx moreso than sx/so, I'd like to point out that I really echo @Comeback Girl's feelings about the so/sx description in terms of wanting to get away from the group. I mean, I love groups, but there's something "dirty" about overlapping the relationship and the group. It becomes harder because then you have to choose between what's best for your relationship and what's best for the group, so it's ideal to migrate the budding relationship out of the group ASAP. I also don't have any desire for the group to know how my relationship is progressing unless it's information I've sanctioned for group knowledge, since the relationship is more intimate than the group relationship. I just don't want that tension there - much later, when we're an established couple, the relationship-in-group situation can re-emerge with much more comfort, since we are a stable unit (and what's better than having your partner and your family around?!), but until that, I prefer to keep them separate.

EVERY.SINGLE.WORD.OF.IT.

I also hate the pressure and expectations that come with dating someone from the same circle.But that's not the main issue. the thing is I like to have clean cut limits established in my life, I don't mix my circles if I can't help it.

I can't phantom how people can share every single detail of their love lives with others. I like my privacy, thank you very much :dry:.
 

The Great One

New member
Joined
Apr 27, 2012
Messages
3,439
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
6w7
(Didn't know my instinctual type, did a test so I could tell if this works for me.)

This doesn't really work for me. Ever since the first time I wanted to seduce someone, groups have made the seduction process harder for me. People are very judgmental when it comes to seduction, I've never come across someone who had a positive opinion about me wanting to seduce someone. Whenever I'm in a group and I want to seduce someone, I have to resist to that temptation and hold myself in. It seems like other people only approve of my seduction choices when I want to seduce someone they picked for me (I never met a good match maker). So when it comes to seduction, I prefer doing it in situations where no one I know could witness it. Sometimes I'll even try to find excuses to meet up with someone one on one. I've never planned a murder, but I think that would feel the exact same way as planning to seduce someone (except for the sexual/romantic part). No, people and groups are the root of evil when it comes to seduction.

Interesting. So then what you are saying is that you prefer to seduce people one on one then? I find this fascinating because someone else posted something else in this thread from the Favres that described exactly what you are describing here to a T. It basically said that the so/sx seduction style is as follows:

First, they meet someone often times through a group setting. After that they choose to single out their target and take them to the side and interact one-on-one with them (SX style). Then after they are comfortable with one another and have developed chemistry (through chatting, going on dates, or whatever), they then introduce them to their group, social click, or whatever. So then finally, after this person has been introduced to their group, they then really prefer to often times hang out with both their click and their significant other at the same time (but not always).

I think that the popular TV show, "How I Met Your Mother" paints a good picture of the So/sx seduction style. After all, I believe that just about every character in that show is so/sx except for maybe Robin (I think she is So/sp). BTW, I still believe that Ted is So/sx as well, but I think that he's so/sx darkside (social first with very strong sx). Anyway, if you look at how the people in that show date, it strongly personifies the so/sx dating style: The characters first meet someone on the side, single them out, and interact with them one-on-one. After that, they go on dates with them one-on-one and develop chemistry with the person. Finally, they then introduce the people to their little so/sx click, and they tend to like to interact with both their click and their lover at the same time.

I should probably also point out the differences in the so/sp vs. so/sx dating styles. The so/sx types tend to have one or two small clicks that they like to hang out with and bring along their lovers to interact with. These clicks are generally just composed of a small amount of people (probably not more than like 3-10 people). So in other words, they generally interact in these small, "How I Met Your Mother" style clicks. However, it seems that the so/sp types tend to like to interact with their lovers in very large social settings with large amounts of people. It seems as though the social/self pres types tend to almost be like politicians taking their lovers to large charity balls, in the fact they they love large group settings. lol, now of course the so/sp people aren't all going to take their lovers to large charity balls specifically, but they do tend to favor large social settings, that's all I'm saying.

A perfect example of the So/sp dating style can be found in the show, "Breaking Bad". In that show, Walter's wife Skyler is pretty much the poster child for so/sp. She constantly is dragging Walter to these extremely large gatherings with hundreds of people in them and is constantly gossiping and working the social arena. She is very much like a politician in this way. I believe that she takes Walter to these events because it brings her great joy to go to these events, and she believes that Walter will have a good time doing this as well. And she believes that through both of them going to these events and having such a great time at these events, that the fun and excitement will bring them closer together as a couple.

"Breaking Bad" also brings me to my next dating style, which is the sp/so. Walter from that show is an excellent example of how a sp/so treats dating and relationships. Walter, like many of the sp/so types is a very hard worker: He first goes to work and works all day at his job teaching high school chemistry. At that point, he will then go out with Jessie and cook up meth and get his product on the street to make even more money and meet his self-pres needs. Finally, when he comes home, all he wants to do is relax, be comfortable, and maybe have a beer or something. He then will maybe eat with his wife and son and will just bond with them, and chill out. This is his way of being closer to his family and to his wife.

I've noticed that one key difference that separates the so/sp people from the sp/so people, is that the sp/so people do not like to mix work and play, while the so/sp people do. It seems to me like the so/sp people are always working from sun up until sun down. I've noticed that they also often like to go to social networking events after work, and build even more social contacts as well. The funny thing is that many of the so/sp people won't really view this as doing work at all. They will enjoy the fun of having drinks, socializing, and engaging in activities with others and at the same time they will be building more social contacts that can help them to climb the social ladder and to advance in their careers and they highly enjoy mixing both of these activities at the same time.

However, the sp/so people are different. The sp/so people like to work hard all day, and then just come home or engage in some type of fun activity to relax. In fact, the sp/so may network with people as well, but they will view it as work, and will not view it as play. The sp/so does not like to mix work and play: they either like to do one or the other. The sp/so either works hard at their job, or they relax, not both.

:hifive:!



Given the new realization that I'm so/sx moreso than sx/so, I'd like to point out that I really echo @Comeback Girl's feelings about the so/sx description in terms of wanting to get away from the group. I mean, I love groups, but there's something "dirty" about overlapping the relationship and the group. It becomes harder because then you have to choose between what's best for your relationship and what's best for the group, so it's ideal to migrate the budding relationship out of the group ASAP. I also don't have any desire for the group to know how my relationship is progressing unless it's information I've sanctioned for group knowledge, since the relationship is more intimate than the group relationship. I just don't want that tension there - much later, when we're an established couple, the relationship-in-group situation can re-emerge with much more comfort, since we are a stable unit (and what's better than having your partner and your family around?!), but until that, I prefer to keep them separate.

So in other words, you like to seduce one-on-one for two reasons: The first reason, is because you do not want to be socially judged for what you are doing. By this I mean that you don't want anyone in your little so/sx clicks to disapprove of your selection of mates, you don't want them to laugh at you if you fail at a seduction, or you don't want them to judge your choice of strategies to obtain these mates. The second reason is because seducing one-on-one is more intense? Am I understanding this correctly?
 

Nymphie

New member
Joined
Dec 29, 2013
Messages
62
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I like cute/pretty boy nerdy types. I usually think "They're so cute! I wanna fuck them...hard." Never tried to seduce anyone yet, though.
 

Halla74

Artisan Conquerer
Joined
Jan 20, 2009
Messages
6,898
MBTI Type
ESTP
Enneagram
7w8
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
I have been investigating the seduction styles of various individuals with various enneagram variant combinations. Here is what I've noticed about how each enneagram stack seduces people....

Interesting! :happy:

Sx/so​

The sexual/social style of seduction is almost like a tiger hunting for prey.

False, this has nothing to do with seduction - it's how we pursue anything that we are interested in, or committed to.
Most Sx/So people with a healthy mindset will be more apt to communicate interest in another person, for seduction is many times associated with an ulterior motive, and we're too damn impatient to waste time with such shite.

The sexual/social style of seduction is very direct and in your face. There is no confusion as to what the sx/so is after.

Again, what isn't "in your face" about Sx/So norms of communication and self-expression?
There's rarely a need to guess about how we feel about anything - whether we're hungry, thirsty, bored, having fun, or as we're discussing at present - interested in another

The sx/so style of seduction can either come off as extremely sexy or down-right creepy.

There are some people who come across as creepy when they ask for a glass of water. :ack!:
As far as sexy is concerned, beauty (and thus attraction) is in the eye of the beholder, and thus unless there is some ironclad evidence that there is strong romantic attraction between two people, then any communication from on to the other that is in the realm of expressing intense romantic attraction has a huge probability of landing on "creepy" and a slim chance in hell of being "sexy."
We know where we stand with all things, we are able to communicate this to others in very short order, and we are also very much able to determine what amount of any sentiments we've expressed have been requited - and to what degree we should pursue them, and at what time. This goes for matters that are platonic, business related, or romantic. We don't waste time. It is not our nature.

With this style of seduction the individual in question goes to a social group and basically steals people out of that social group and makes their own group.

I call bullshit on this - TOTAL BULLSHIT in fact. :thumbdown:
Will we walk up to a group of people totally unknown to us and introduce ourselves, and integrate with their conversation? Yes, absolutely.
We'll maintain harmony with the members of that group, and if any within that group wish to socialize with us outside the boundaries of the group we met them - that's fine, and if they wish to return to their group with or without us, that's great too.
We don't need to steal people out of groups. We are at one with the world around us, at peace with ourselves, and with all others - whether as individuals or in a group of some kind.
We are the real deal "people people" - our experiences with others are treasured, and so it makes jack-shit of any sense whatsoever that we'd try to socially engineer division within an existing group of people for any reason. That is against everything we stand for.

Also, they can infiltrate the social group and work through the group to seduce the individual.

Again, unhealthy and selfishly intended people are capable of many bad things, but I hardly think that has anything to do with an Sx/So person's default means of expressing romantic interest in another person. The scenario described above is the head-game playing shite of so many bad movies and TV shows. Blech. :tongue10:

FYI - none of the above is disgruntlement directed at you; I simply don't agree with how the material in the OP categorizes people who are Sx/So, or their intentions or mechanisms of expressing romantic interest. It's far too general, and it is skewed at describing patterns of behavior typically utilized by selfish, dishonest, unhealthy people.

:solidarity:

-Halla74
 

skylights

i love
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
7,756
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
So in other words, you like to seduce one-on-one for two reasons: The first reason, is because you do not want to be socially judged for what you are doing. By this I mean that you don't want anyone in your little so/sx clicks to disapprove of your selection of mates, you don't want them to laugh at you if you fail at a seduction, or you don't want them to judge your choice of strategies to obtain these mates. The second reason is because seducing one-on-one is more intense? Am I understanding this correctly?

Well, I don't really think much in terms of social judgment of failing at seduction. I tend to think that a relationship succeeding or failing has more to do with the compatibility of two people and less as being a personal reflection on my ability. So following that, I don't really think about what people think of me and my success or failure to engage in relationships beyond what they think of my overall health towards relationships in general. I don't really think about others' opinion of my strategies either because that also seems like something that is between the object of my affection and myself (though again, I would not want to be seen as someone who is unhealthy about how she conducts her interpersonal relations and relationships).

I was a fairly late bloomer in terms of relationships in general, and I know some people thought of me as being prudish, but I never really cared because I just had other priorities. I would rather have been thought of as a prude than as boy-crazy or irresponsible. When I did begin to care, I cared most about what my partner thought of me, not whether others approved of the pairing or not. I always think my partner is a good person - I wouldn't be with them otherwise - so I judge other people if they don't see that about them more than I worry about others' judgment of us. I care a lot about what people think of me but it's in a more complex way that approval or disapproval. I don't mind them disapproving of me as long as they see me the way I want to be seen.

In a similar vein, I do desire the people who are important to me to like my partner if at all possible, because I don't like my relationship to be a cause of bad feelings for anyone. That said, I have never abandoned a partner because of others' negative opinions of them. I feel like it is most important whether I see them as a good person or not. If someone has a negative opinion of them, I do my best to change that. I do, however, consider if their negative opinions have any weight. My boyfriend (who used to work with me) said something cruel once to one of my coworkers, for instance, and she harbors a negative opinion of him for that. I don't hold it against my boyfriend because everyone slips up sometimes, and he said it in response to her not wanting to do a duty that was part of her job - he had to do it, adding extra work to an already hectic day - because she refused. So ideally I would like them to like each other but in the meantime I try to be nice to my coworker as well as my boyfriend and I do my best to see things from both of their perspectives without betraying either of them. He knows how I feel about the situation and even though maybe sometimes he wishes I would just always take his side, he also says that he admires how I try to get along with everyone. In the past I was codependent with a partner who treated me poorly, and others' negative opinions of that person were a big part of getting me out of codependency. There was finally a point at which they treated someone I loved like crap and that was when I was able to completely break away from them. So I feel like my internal sense of give-and-take, kindness, and interpersonal relations is important.

So, to finally get to seducing one-on-one, it is more about the privacy and intimacy than intensity, though the intensity is pleasing too. I don't mind being with my partner in a group - I actually like it a lot - but I don't want to do my seducing in the group setting because I don't want to reveal the same extent of myself to the group as I do for my partner. I also don't like feeling "torn" between being loyal to the group (especially my family) or loyal to my partner. The longer my partner and I have been together, the better I understand them and have had a chance to smooth things between them and the group, so it becomes easier and easier to be loyal to both simultaneously.
 
Top