User Tag List

First 345

Results 41 to 50 of 50

  1. #41
    reborn PeaceBaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    937 so/sx
    Posts
    6,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skylights View Post
    PS - Not sure I can see myself as an energy provider, or other Socials like that. I see the creator-preserver-destroyer triad and I love the idea but I don't think it necessarily works here. Maybe Social as energy/resource rearranger if anything.
    It's not constant energy-out, no. If you think of it as regularly being willing to "grease the wheel" to start the process of connecting, does that help? (I will expand on it later, but heading to bed atm.)
    "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

  2. #42
    Away with the fairies Southern Kross's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 so/sp
    Posts
    2,912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OrangeAppled View Post
    I think sp-first get accused of this the most. But the idea of having some right to the demand seems so, yes.
    Well, Sp-firsts tend to get accused of hiding something but So-firsts seem to give the impression they have nothing going on underneath worth hiding (online anyway, not IRL).

    But the energy it takes to respond sometimes is overwhelming.
    I know that feeling. But I usually don't want to even hear the 'demand' in the first place - hence why I'm so difficult to get hold of (by phone call, text, email etc). It's too much to stress over.

    I suspect this self-preservation aspect is also protecting me from putting out energy where I may not receive anything back, so I make others "prove" it).
    The way I've come to see the function stacking is that the first instinct is used as a tool to serve the second. That can manifest in different ways at different times, even with people of the same stacking, but the fundamentals remain the same.

    One simplified version of this for me is: I avoid facing social demands as a means of protecting myself. Perhaps you withhold yourself in order to manage your energy investment.

    When someone is sx-dom, I think it's like they don't realize how much they are demanding. They just seem aware of what they are putting out, and not considering they are not always reciprocating, but just sucking, or that their giving feels like it has strings attached.
    Yes, I think you're right. I've been directly asked questions by Sx-firsts that are touching things that are uncomfortably personal, and it's difficult for me to deal with that. I try to give an answer, which is usually honest yet superficial, but I'm aware is dodging the unrestrained expression they wanted. In some ways it's flattering to have someone actually give a damn, but usually I just feel embarrassed that I'm dodging and hope they take the hint. I don't exactly blame them for asking unless they continue to press the matter - and it does seem that Sx-firsts notice when I'm dodging and love to point out. Then it's like being asked by someone who you're not close with to remove all your clothes so they can take a good look at you, then getting irritated when you politely refuse.

    The so type's "giving" feels like it has strings attached too, but not in the luring-in way an sx's does, where they seem to begin to take at a higher rate than they are giving once they've "got you".
    I think So-first can inadvertently give off a sense that their basic pleasantries are a prelude to something so much more. Sometimes it is and sometimes it isn't, but if there is a closer bond to be created, it takes a lot more/longer to achieve than others expect it will.

    Quote Originally Posted by small.wonder View Post
    though the only time she ever gave voice to that was after much passive aggression, when she ended basically telling me that she resented the "power over her" she'd given me by allowing emotional intimacy. This flabbergasted me because I'd felt manipulated by her...obviously it's a long story, but it was definitely mutually agreed on as not a great thing-- at least not to have as a staple friendship.
    Yeah, it's strange how intimacy can feel like a power game, even if it isn't meant as such.

    I am sorry you have have had negative experience with Sx first individuals and the way the have framed those with different instincts, though I'm not sure I'm guilty of that personally. I've definitely been frustrated by the disconnect it sometimes causes in relationships, but would never blame that on the other person or who they are.
    Don't feel like you have to apologise. I didn't mean it as a play for sympathy. I just wanted to get back to more balanced discussion before everyone continued jumping on the anti-Sx-lasts* bandwagon.

    *Not that it was meant as such (ie. this is not an accusation). But being a So-first I am more attuned to the tidal movement of the discourse and where it's shifting to, and that was what I reacted to.

    I feel a similar sentiment of being "written off" as a Sx dom too, like I'm just too much for everyone and feeling like I set fire to things, and people just steer clear of me. This is not reality, but it is how I feel sometimes!
    Oh, I didn't mean that I think any one stacking has a monopoly on being misunderstood. My sister is a Sx-first and I see the impact that others' rejection, criticism and dismissal has on her. I also see how disappointing her relationships with others tend to be for her - people always let her down.

    I think that in reality, both the positives and negatives are shared equally among all the stackings, but online there is a certain discourse that doesn't accept or reflect that reality. I guess it's a bit like how posts about MBTI and JCF recently have had this "evil Fe" underlying attitude. Sure there are issues with Fe but it's no better or worse than any other function. In other words, the level of discussion about the problems with Fe is disproportionate to the degree with which these problems exist IRL (ie. the criticism itself is fair, but the degree of criticism is not). The same goes with Sx-lasts and So-users in particular - to the point that people would rather not type as such (and mistype because of it). Does that make sense?
    INFP 4w5 so/sp

    I've dreamt in my life dreams that have stayed with me ever after, and changed my ideas;
    they've gone through and through me, like wine through water, and altered the colour of my mind.

    - Emily Bronte

  3. #43
    Away with the fairies Southern Kross's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 so/sp
    Posts
    2,912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skylights View Post
    So I think... Patterns being... I notice a theme of difficulty to "get in" to their intimate feelings. That might be represented by a shell, or by time needed to establish connection, or by certain "keys" being needed to feel ready to open up with someone. It's also usually a limited amount of people they bond deeply with, but the bonds are very strong where they exist. And they may not prefer the emotionally, dynamically charged, urgent expression of feeling that I think sx-strong people tend to prefer.

    FWIW, I do not think they are "less deep". I used to fear that, which is as lacking in truth as N being "deeper" than S. Both are illusions brought about by differing ways of conveying information. I think if Sx-first feels like they are not getting enough or if Sx-last feels like they are overwhelmed (and even as Sx-second I have personally felt overwhelmed by some Sx-firsts!), then it is probably a "lost in translation" more than an inherent flaw on either person's part.
    I whole-heartedly agree and these are excellent observations. This is a very true of me.

    First - want to say that I emphasize with the feelings in your post. Sx-last tendencies seem to become a scapegoat for Sx-first frustration sometimes.
    Yes. Especially (self-proclaimed) Sx-first, IxxP users against So-firsts. I think that the Social instinct can be seen as the major source of social oppression and the enforcer of conformity against the outcast.

    The funny thing is, being highly sensitive to that vibe probably makes you a Social-first

    IRT the quote - Can you give an example of what you mean? I don't think I've heard this before, or maybe I have and I don't realize.
    I went on a date with a guy who was a Sx-first and he asked a lot of pointed personal questions, like about my religious beliefs. It wasn't the questions so much but how much he pushed the issue. I explained I was an agnostic atheist and my associated beliefs in a matter of fact (perhaps superficial) way but he seemed frustrated about my answer (it didn't help that we don't speak the same native language either). He kept prodding as if he wanted me to express the underlying motivation in more emotional/unrestrained terms but I wouldn't/couldn't. My measured response, which I spent some years figuring out, perhaps was too cold and intellectual for him. I started to get uncomfortable because I know I'm dodging intimacy to some degree (see above post), but I was also becoming irritated that he continued to dig at the issue. I can't stand a demand for emotional expression because: 1. I don't owe that to someone I'm not close to; 2. I'm not a performing clown and my emotions are not for others' entertainment; 3. sometimes there isn't an immediate emotion behind it, because I'm not feeling anything strongly about it in that particular moment; 4. I refuse to feign enthusiasm, passion, or earnestness or whatever in order to make others more comfortable because that would be inauthentic.

    PS - Not sure I can see myself as an energy provider, or other Socials like that. I see the creator-preserver-destroyer triad and I love the idea but I don't think it necessarily works here. Maybe Social as energy/resource rearranger if anything.
    That's why I agreed to it in broad terms only and not so literally. The social instinct can take on the role of energy manager just as much as provider, but in objective terms the result comes across a form of providing/sustaining energy. Sp for example, can come across as a destroyer in that it is miserly with sharing its energy, but it can also be the knife that cuts through the tension in a situation. I would argue Jennifer Lawrence is a Sp/So and you see her as functioning more like the latter.
    Last edited by Southern Kross; 08-14-2014 at 02:42 AM.
    INFP 4w5 so/sp

    I've dreamt in my life dreams that have stayed with me ever after, and changed my ideas;
    they've gone through and through me, like wine through water, and altered the colour of my mind.

    - Emily Bronte
    Likes decrescendo liked this post

  4. #44
    Sweet Ocean Cloud SD45T-2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    1w2 so/sp
    Posts
    2,758

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Kross View Post
    I went on a date with a guy who was a Sx-firsts and he asked a lot of pointed personal questions, like about my religious beliefs. It wasn't the questions so much but how much he pushed the issue. I explained I was an agnostic atheist and my associated beliefs in a matter of fact (perhaps superficial) way but he seemed frustrated about my answer (it didn't help that we don't speak the same native language either). He kept prodding as if he wanted me to express the underlying motivation in more emotional/unrestrained terms but I wouldn't/couldn't. My measured response, which I spent some years figuring out, perhaps was too cold and intellectual for him. I started to get uncomfortable because I know I'm dodging intimacy to some degree (see above post), but I was also becoming irritated that he continued to dig at the issue. I can't stand a demand for emotional expression because: 1. I don't owe that to someone I'm not close to; 2. I'm not a performing clown and my emotions are not for others' entertainment; 3. sometimes there isn't an immediate emotion behind it, because I'm not feeling anything strongly about in that particular moment; 4. I refuse to feign enthusiasm, passion, or earnestness or whatever in order to make others more comfortable because that would be inauthentic.
    This is pretty much perfect.

    It's exasperating when someone is expecting you to unveil something that you just don't have and never claimed to have in the first place. Experiences like that make me even more paranoid and selective (or you could say picky) about choosing interactions.
    1w2-6w5-3w2 so/sp

    "I took one those personality tests. It came back negative." - Dan Mintz

  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 PeaceBaby View Post
    It's not constant energy-out, no. If you think of it as regularly being willing to "grease the wheel" to start the process of connecting, does that help? (I will expand on it later, but heading to bed atm.)
    Yes, definitely! I apologize, I misunderstood "provider" to be "originator", as in who creates the energy. I definitely feel like I "reach across gaps" often. I can get on board with that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Kross View Post
    I whole-heartedly agree and these are excellent observations. This is a very true of me.
    Cool, I'm glad this rings true. Thank you.

    Yes. Especially (self-proclaimed) Sx-first, IxxP users against So-firsts. I think that the Social instinct can be seen as the major source of social oppression and the enforcer of conformity against the outcast.

    The funny thing is, being highly sensitive to that vibe probably makes you a Social-first
    Lol, right? Soc can catch a lot of crap for being seen as the one "responsible" for inclusion/exclusion. But IMO Social-firsts really don't create that as much as we just are attentive to the how and why of it, just as the other instincts are more attentive in their domains.

    I went on a date with a guy who was a Sx-first and he asked a lot of pointed personal questions, like about my religious beliefs. It wasn't the questions so much but how much he pushed the issue. I explained I was an agnostic atheist and my associated beliefs in a matter of fact (perhaps superficial) way but he seemed frustrated about my answer (it didn't help that we don't speak the same native language either). He kept prodding as if he wanted me to express the underlying motivation in more emotional/unrestrained terms but I wouldn't/couldn't. My measured response, which I spent some years figuring out, perhaps was too cold and intellectual for him. I started to get uncomfortable because I know I'm dodging intimacy to some degree (see above post), but I was also becoming irritated that he continued to dig at the issue. I can't stand a demand for emotional expression because: 1. I don't owe that to someone I'm not close to; 2. I'm not a performing clown and my emotions are not for others' entertainment; 3. sometimes there isn't an immediate emotion behind it, because I'm not feeling anything strongly about it in that particular moment; 4. I refuse to feign enthusiasm, passion, or earnestness or whatever in order to make others more comfortable because that would be inauthentic.
    Yeah, it really makes sense to hear that experience through your perspective. It sounds frustrating.

    I echo the feeling that sometimes Sx-first "fast depth" and depth-plunging is hard to keep up with and still feel like I can give honestly and openly of myself, even as much as I enjoy and appreciate Sx-first people... I feel like I cannot internally transition that fast sometimes. It is different here on message board than it is in real life - here I have distance and time to "soften". IRL for the most part I love listening to my Sx-first friends but sometimes struggle when they desire an immediate or strong reaction out of me.

    I had an experience at work with a Sx/So manager once... I love her, she has an amazing personality and is incredibly involved in humanitarian and artistic work in my city. But when she was the person directly supervising me at work, and I was in charge of a department of people, she would both get snappy and harsh at me about the department but then later tell me really personal sad and otherwise emotionally heavy stories from her life. Eventually one day I had to tell her that I couldn't sustain both the manager relationship and the friendship relationship with her - because she would be harsh and demanding towards me about a work issue and then turn around and seek deep empathy from me. And while I can totally do both of those - I'm used to overbearing Te in the workplace, it was that company's MO, and I'm also happy to offer deep Fi - I couldn't swing between them like that. I would feel incredibly overwhelmed and it was so hard to orient my authentic feelings and get in touch with them quickly when that same person needing them had made me bristle so recently. Fortunately she soon rotated through management roles to a different position, and I work elsewhere now, so we are able to be just friends! And she wrote me an awesome letter of recommendation.

    That's why I agreed to it in broad terms only and not so literally. The social instinct can take on the role of energy manager just as much as provider, but in objective terms the result comes across a form of providing/sustaining energy. Sp for example, can come across as a destroyer in that it is miserly with sharing its energy, but it can also be the knife that cuts through the tension in a situation. I would argue Jennifer Lawrence is a Sp/So and you see her as functioning more like the latter.
    Yeah, that makes sense. I could see Sp/So with her for sure.

  6. #46
    Away with the fairies Southern Kross's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 so/sp
    Posts
    2,912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skylights View Post
    Lol, right? Soc can catch a lot of crap for being seen as the one "responsible" for inclusion/exclusion. But IMO Social-firsts really don't create that as much as we just are attentive to the how and why of it, just as the other instincts are more attentive in their domains.
    Exactly.

    I echo the feeling that sometimes Sx-first "fast depth" and depth-plunging is hard to keep up with and still feel like I can give honestly and openly of myself, even as much as I enjoy and appreciate Sx-first people... I feel like I cannot internally transition that fast sometimes.
    Yeah, same here. I like the depth; I just need to work up to it.

    I had a Sx/So boss a bit like that too, but it was probably worse. Being on friendly terms with your boss is great to a degree but there's a danger in it. In situations of work disagreement (he encouraged us to debate over creative elements) he would bring up personal stuff about me and say how that might be a factor in why I'm not seeing things 'right' or getting his point of view . And sometimes I just needed to be told, "do it this way" so I had some clarity and didn't have to go through all that shit only for him to try to manipulate me into his viewpoint anyway. He would also come in certain mornings like a pit bull (unlike his usual chirpy, friendly self) and start tearing everything apart - going after my workmate and telling him off about everything he should be doing. All this didn't make the workplace more comfortable and relaxed, it just made it a lot more emotionally fraught.

    He also used to pull the emotional demand thing, when he would tell me about a new idea he thought was really exciting. I would listen, nod and start think about the potential viability of it (which was necessary, as he had some crackpot ideas that would never work), but he what he really wanted me to do was jump around the room with him in excitement. He then got really disappointed and upset at my lack of immediate enthusiasm like a kicked puppy. And I end up getting guilt-tripped because my natural reaction to the information is not sufficiently feeding his high.

    Note: I don't think all Sx-firsts are like this at all. He was a unhealthy version of every type he was (ENFP 7w6 Sx/So).

    Yeah, that makes sense. I could see Sp/So with her for sure.
    Really? And here I was expecting a debate about it.

    The thing is I think most Sx-users would never consider Jennifer Lawrence a Sx-last, with all her charm, energy and intensity. In some ways I want to hold her up as an example of how wrong the stereotypes can be.
    INFP 4w5 so/sp

    I've dreamt in my life dreams that have stayed with me ever after, and changed my ideas;
    they've gone through and through me, like wine through water, and altered the colour of my mind.

    - Emily Bronte

  7. #47
    i love skylights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 so/sx
    Socionics
    EII Ne
    Posts
    7,835

    Default

    @Southern Kross,

    I wrote a nice reply that my iPad just deleted!

    In short, the boss situation sounds very frustrating! Glad you are out of that.

    I try to maintain "professional distance" from the people above and below me in rank at work, because otherwise I have trouble separating what is justified for me to do personally versus professionally. Like I would end up always wearing myself thin for them if I got emotionally close to a manager (like I did). I could definitely imagine this could be frustrating for a Sx-dom who wanted to connect better.

    As for Jennifer Lawrence, she seems more blunt and relatable to me than intense and "drawing in". I don't get much Sx out of her. I think she's often contrasted with Kristen Stewart, who seems more Sp/Sx to me.

  8. #48
    Senior Member The Great One's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    6w7
    Posts
    3,461

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Turtle View Post
    I keep reading that SX-lasters find intimacy difficult, and that they connect with very few people on a deeper level partially due to their lesser need for connection. This hasn't been my experience with my ENTJ, who is a so/sp and a 3w4. He finds it difficult to connect with people on a deeper level (unless they are both talking about great ideas in computer science or some other topic related to hard science and/or math), and he is very reluctant to share the inner workings with his mind with just anyone. However, he was always very interested in who he felt he could "connect" with, and very aware of how well he connected with people. We were casual friends for about a month until one day we got into an extremely deep conversation that lasted for hours, and after that he locked on to me as someone he wanted to date (which I picked up on, even though he acted outwardly aloof about it until he was sure I felt the same way). We spent the next few months talking late into the night, every night. He fell in love with me very quickly (before we were even dating), and cites me as the first girl he truly connected with. Since then, EVERYTHING has been about "connection." Even in our current relationship, he places our "connection" over EVERYTHING else -- even physical intimacy. He would be perfectly content (and even prefer) snuggling and revealing the inner workings of his mind to me over doing anything physical. Even though he is a 3w4 and as an ENTJ, he keeps emphasizing how he wants to be authentic with me and reveal exactly how he works, even if it will "scare me." He is very intent on learning how I operate, and we typically get lost in conversation. To me, this is largely inconsistent with what I've read about so/sp. Don't get me wrong -- the sx-aux part of me (as a so/sx) loves the fact that he emphasizes our emotional connection over all else in our relationship. But if sx-lasters don't really place much emphasis on intimacy or deep connection, why does he seem to emphasize it above all else? For what it's worth, I do not think that he is anything other than so/sp.
    I saw your thread on your boyfriend that you created, and the way that you describe him, he seems sp/sx to me, not so/sp. All the man does is work, work, work and isn't really about forming social connections or alliances with people. The work-a-holic 3 is the sp 3. You said, he also mistyped as a 1 for a long time, and the sp 3 often mistypes as a one, and looks very much like a one at the core surface.

  9. #49
    Senior Member The Great One's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    6w7
    Posts
    3,461

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by five sounds View Post
    I had a relationship with an sp/so. Much like redbone said, it left me hungry and lonely feeling. He also told me that it was the deepest, closest, most intimate relationship he'd ever had. I constantly felt like I was 'pushing' him to get closer, open up, etc. One thing we were, though, was great friends and companions. We did great in social situations together, making people laugh and making friends. He also was terrible at maintaining personal connections, so his friends started keeping in touch with me, and he saw them more as a result. He was also an introvert, so forgive me if I'm blurring those differences.

    Where we struggled, or where I struggled, was in our intimacy. He always felt very far away from me. The most intense feeling I ever felt when we were close was one of protection. We never shared passionate moments, soul spilling conversations where we just went deep and let it all hang out, it was all very...stuffy. Ultimately I wound up like sx starved.
    I am an sx dom, and once dated a so/sp woman. When I kissed her, I felt like the woman in the movie, "Ghost" with Patrick Swayze. It was like I was kissing something that wasn't there. Sx last types are way too slow to develop an intense connection.

  10. #50
    Blind Guardian Haven's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Enneagram
    2w3 so/sp
    Socionics
    ESFj Ti
    Posts
    1,076

    Default

    I haven't experienced a connection with someone in about 1.5 years since my ex.
    {The Diplomat}
    Slytherpuff
    s|L|OAx
    Meow.

Similar Threads

  1. what is your type and which type do you feel most compatible with (relationship-wise)
    By Othon in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-20-2014, 08:33 PM
  2. Do you see the problem with typing others? Is it worth it?
    By Chancelade in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 01-23-2014, 07:37 PM
  3. Your Name: Do you feel the connection?
    By figsfiggyfigs in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 50
    Last Post: 06-27-2011, 12:28 PM
  4. How often do you feel that life is passing next to you?
    By Virtual ghost in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 06-24-2009, 09:42 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