I agree for Sx and So (relatively speaking), but I'm with OA about the Sp definition. I'm going to be lame and quote my own definition from a previous thread (with some editing because it's kinda icky reading now):
Self-pres instinct
Driven by a sense of the fragility of one's own existence. Sp-doms are highly threatened by external elements they believe that may destabilise their ability to flourish. They fear that outside forces may erode their 'separateness' and gradually consume them. Their sense of body and identity is so indefinite they feel compelled to draw strong personal boundaries in which to protect themselves. They feel the need to actively fight to retain the cornerstones that are so precious to them. These may include: comfort, health, autonomy, dignity, privacy, strength/power, reliability, accuracy, reputation, knowledge, safety, individuality etc. Sp-doms seek to establish an environment of personal security and selfhood, which will enable them to thrive.
I don't know if this is 100% correct, but it seems to basically encapsulate what I've observed. What do you think [MENTION=6561]OrangeAppled[/MENTION]?
I think this is better, yes. I think that many so descriptions rightfully include how a strong so instinct can make someone shy or inhibited. I think sp descriptions do well to include how sp can make someone indulgent & reckless, which would appear opposite of seeking security or stability, but it's a security via autonomy via rejection of classic stability/security (which can be confining). Many things that others find to bring security can feel like it overwhelms me to maintain & even threatens my identity; it asks me to "conform" too much. To an absurd degree, I pursue a lifestyle in which I have very little accountability to any human. This is "security" to me, although I do not generally use that word or see it that way, because of its connotations being all wrong. The most threatening thing to my survival, which I experience as my individual identity, is to have to play by rules which ask me to be something I am not, to care about things I don't care about, to have my strengths devalued & asked to be repressed, etc. I recognize the immaturity here, but it also drives me to take care of myself 100% & to accept the bumps in the road in rejecting certain "securities". As sp, you are not necessarily responsible in the classic sense, but you take the responsibility, if that makes sense.
I have a difficult time asking for help from others. I don't want to be a burden, but I also have shame at needing help & fear of being indebted. Admitting I need not only help, but also friendship & love & human contact in general was a big thing for me, and although it began years ago, it's still a struggle with practicalities & even reaching out to friends. I feel like sx-dom are more comfortable with a dependance on others, even emotionally.
See, I've always seen any intensity in you as being out of a strong desire to establish a line in the sand with regards to your identity (eg. "this is what I'm not" or "this is what I won't put up with"). I think one of the major mistakes people make when it comes to the understanding the instincts is that they fail to take into account where the expression comes from. Sure, Sx is often associated with a passionate nature, but couldn't a Sp be passionate about protecting their personal boundaries? Passion and intensity aren't the foundation for the Sexual instinct; they are merely the resulting expressions of a strong desire for profound connection.
This is an astute observation, and I do agree. But I very much have an angry resentment that goes beyond my identity & is more classic 4 envy that others "have" what I long for, especially if I deem them less deserving somehow. But as I said, it's classic 4, which tends to look sx to those with a less refined eye for type.
I don't think they relate to those things either but I see it in some of the attitudes toward typing, for example. People are very reluctant to see extroverted or fun loving people as potentially Sp-dom, but they can be just that.
Much of what people attribute to sx (which is like, everything) is really so & sp stuff, but if you add "passion" or "intensity" into it, then people think it's sx.
Passionate about interests, hobbies, and knowledge & like pursuing them independently? sp!
Want novel & intense sensory experiences? just as likely sp/sx as sx-dom
Want strong, enduring, personal & even intimate connections? so!
Repel or attract people strongly? Could be so, depending on if you've cracked their social code or have fumbled
With So-doms there can be this perception that all they care about is impressing and appeasing others, either out of insecurity and/or out of a pathetic and desperate ambition to succeed. It's seen as uncool to care about what other people think - it's basically code for conformism and neediness.
I have a different distortion of the so, which is that they are "magical". They have these skills & insights that I have difficulty comprehending the workings of. I know many suffer from social anxiety and inhibition & shyness, but they may even simply have an awareness & understanding of the world & its workings on a global level that is daunting to me. I admit, I often don't care, but when I do venture to peek into this part of life the manner of dissecting & making connections & predictions, etc, is impressively complex to me. I feel small-minded when I acknowledge my main preoccupations in life are finding a romantic soul mate & achieving the level of autonomy I feel I need to meet my ideals.