The variants/subtypes and "casual intensity'

[Hopelandic]

I'm interested to pursue this question to illuminate the more literal vs abstract notions of the variants. Especially the sexual variant (sex vs "missing piece").

By definition/purely on principal, how would each of the subtypes approach something like casual sex? or casual relationships? (acquaintances, friendships where you are aligned because of work, school but don't really match otherwise etc)



__________________________________________________________________

For me, I find it hard to do anything casually. Mainly with regards to relationships. Those in the "sexual instinct purely as intensity" may say that sexual types readily jump into any encounter that gives them intensity. However, I personally am very discriminant about where the intensity is coming from, what kind it is, and whether it matches my being.

When I don't connect or have great rapport/effortless connection with someone, in any context, I end up feeling hollow. I like all kinds of people, but I really feel hollow (by my standards) with most people unless they "match" me. Which is why I find keeping friends hard. I look for this match and through that I am fulfilled by the right degree of intensity; rather than getting an oomph purely out of an 'intense experience' with -anyone-.

There are some who would seek casual experiences on the basis of pure physical attraction (looks) but i'm more of a 'whole package'/'presence' kind of person. I'm not sure whether I get much intensity fulfillment from looks alone. To me, it's about how you bounce off each other; synergy. Having sex just for fun with a "hot guy" or playful fun with a dude I don't even respect just doesn't tickle my fancy. Just like randomly hanging out with a bunch of people I don't know much 'for fun' doesn't do much for me either. I'll do it and enjoy the moment, but... it doesn't fulfill me.

I wonder if the 'it's just sex' (sex purely as a physical urge... which at the end of the day it literally is. And while I can separate feelings and sex I find it hard to be fulfilled when one is lacking from the equation) is more in the SP domain.

Thoughts?

 

[Lady_X]

i'm the same as you...i'm sx too....probably sx/so but i haven't really decided.

 

[Troisi]

Interesting thread. I was thinking about my personal sense of intensity this morning and some of these ideas as well. I'm a so/sx but I have to preface that I've yet to delve into enneagram theory. Perhaps that'll help give a more unbiased response.

I have a weird sense of intensity and it's a prevalent theme in my life. I guess I would characterize it as a need for "limitlessness". I've always oriented my life towards concepts that are unbounded, transcendental, and even ineffable in nature. And there's a fierce intensity welled inside of me that propels me to act accordingly. I drop the conventionality of life to pursue something unearthly in nature. This morning I looked around, thought about where I was last year and asked myself "Where am I? How did I get here?" And I guess this aspect of my personality permeates relationships as well.

I guess my nature is something unsettling for most people I've met. It seems they need a sense of stability to feel safe or whole and it seems they create it through some form of systematic framework. And that's where I clash with people because my whole being is oriented towards leaping over those walls they create and seeing what lies on the other side. So, to avoid being a menace I reserve my intensity from people. And the few times that I have unraveled myself to someone, it just doesn't turn out well. Time and time again it seems that I come to the same conclusion that I just wasn't built to have intimate relationships with people. I share the same notion of being unfulfilled by casual relationships because to me it just seems like scripted behavior. I need something real, raw, unrefined, true if I decide to engage with people. But I rather not depend on people to feel alive because I never intend to use anyone. So instead of seeking people that can handle me, I rather just concentrate on my personal, individual pursuits that will contain me.

 

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

Interesting thread. I was thinking about my personal sense of intensity this morning and some of these ideas as well. I'm a so/sx but I have to preface that I've yet to delve into enneagram theory. Perhaps that'll help give a more unbiased response.

I have a weird sense of intensity and it's a prevalent theme in my life. I guess I would characterize it as a need for "limitlessness". I've always oriented my life towards concepts that are unbounded, transcendental, and even ineffable in nature. And there's a fierce intensity welled inside of me that propels me to act accordingly. I drop the conventionality of life to pursue something unearthly in nature. This morning I looked around, thought about where I was last year and asked myself "Where am I? How did I get here?" And I guess this aspect of my personality permeates relationships as well.

I guess my nature is something unsettling for most people I've met. It seems they need a sense of stability to feel safe or whole and it seems they create it through some form of systematic framework. And that's where I clash with people because my whole being is oriented towards leaping over those walls they create and seeing what lies on the other side. So, to avoid being a menace I reserve my intensity from people. And the few times that I have unraveled myself to someone, it just doesn't turn out well. Time and time again it seems that I come to the same conclusion that I just wasn't built to have intimate relationships with people. I share the same notion of being unfulfilled by casual relationships because to me it just seems like scripted behavior. I need something real, raw, unrefined, true if I decide to engage with people. But I rather not depend on people to feel alive because I never intend to use anyone. So instead of seeking people that can handle me, I rather just concentrate on my personal, individual pursuits that will contain me.

This is how I feel, sans the last sentence. I think it's an sx dom thing in a highly introverted type. We are compelled to interact deeply, yet reserved by nature. It's a contradiction that is hard to find an answer to.

I think I might just 'give myself' to God.


does that sound kinky? lol

 

[Elfboy]

I'm interested to pursue this question to illuminate the more literal vs abstract notions of the variants. Especially the sexual variant (sex vs "missing piece").

By definition/purely on principal, how would each of the subtypes approach something like casual sex? or casual relationships? (acquaintances, friendships where you are aligned because of work, school but don't really match otherwise etc)



__________________________________________________________________

For me, I find it hard to do anything casually. Mainly with regards to relationships. Those in the "sexual instinct purely as intensity" may say that sexual types readily jump into any encounter that gives them intensity. However, I personally am very discriminant about where the intensity is coming from, what kind it is, and whether it matches my being.

When I don't connect or have great rapport/effortless connection with someone, in any context, I end up feeling hollow. I like all kinds of people, but I really feel hollow (by my standards) with most people unless they "match" me. Which is why I find keeping friends hard. I look for this match and through that I am fulfilled by the right degree of intensity; rather than getting an oomph purely out of an 'intense experience' with -anyone-.

There are some who would seek casual experiences on the basis of pure physical attraction (looks) but i'm more of a 'whole package'/'presence' kind of person. I'm not sure whether I get much intensity fulfillment from looks alone. To me, it's about how you bounce off each other; synergy. Having sex just for fun with a "hot guy" or playful fun with a dude I don't even respect just doesn't tickle my fancy. Just like randomly hanging out with a bunch of people I don't know much 'for fun' doesn't do much for me either. I'll do it and enjoy the moment, but... it doesn't fulfill me.

I wonder if the 'it's just sex' (sex purely as a physical urge... which at the end of the day it literally is. And while I can separate feelings and sex I find it hard to be fulfilled when one is lacking from the equation) is more in the SP domain.

Thoughts?

this post seems to have more to do with your beliefs than your instinctual subtype, but that's just me

 

[Richardsen]

I knew some SXs that are pretty promiscous and bouncy from one people to another without any real conection.
Not in my case (maybe because Im very introverted)
I knew another So/Sx who reserved herself for "the soulmate".

The thing that made me realize that Im Sexual first is my fucked up attitude through my all life ... Not my thoughts. Its Insctint at the end. The missing piece doesn't have to be your soulmate person solely. The SX variant can be expressed in much more diverse ways than Sex, and "One to One" connections.
To name a few in my experience: Self Destructive and erratic behavior, avoiding intense experiences by fear (but this is not unconscious and easy for myself), a distinctive attitude, strong emotions and fantasies "smashed" in the wall...
I have a desire to connect deeply with someone, I dress in a sexually appealing way sometimes, and in other times I isolate myself and go for long periods without talking with anybody. I dont have high expectations of my posible soulmate. When the right person is there I dont mind her interests and personality, Its only conection. (Borderline S/N ???)

I aggree in some points... especially in keeping life - long friends. But maybe antother Sx wouldn't fit in that phrase.


There is a lot of diversity.

 

[Rim]

Sx first would never "just have sex for fun" or something along those lines. What is important (at least my opinion and I'm like this) is the merging with the other person on a deeper level. Sex is just the path to something much much deeper and for me at least (I'm not even Sx first) it isn't meaningful if there is nothing more beyond it. "Just sex" is an Sx last thing.

This search for something more manifests in person-object relationship as well, in the approach towards life.

The way I see it Sx is unstable and when you meet an Sx first...you will know it and feel it in them. Sx first is very visible from the outside.

 

[brainheart]

I think depending on your enneatype, the whole variant thing can be a little misleading. For example, as a four I thought for sure I "must" be a sexual variant, but the more I delved into it, the more I realized it was at the end of the line for me. Fours by their nature are very sexual- by this I mean, fantasizing about a soul mate, longing for a mirror, a helper. I read the general stacking descriptions and I relate to sx/sp the most. But... I'm a pretty stable four. Sure I have my crap, but I really do like stability and I feel a real pull to be socially responsible.

I like deep connections but I'm really hesitant to bare my soul. I hide behind a cloak of appropriateness and reserve. I desire a more dramatic life than I have, but I feel I lack the energy to pursue it and I don't want to rock my social network (family). I can't deal with disapproval- it's earth-shattering to me. So I play it safe. Sexual variant types seem too intense to hold it in- sexual fours lack the self consciousness I guess or the social shame, I don't know.

I wouldn't say sex is 'just sex' for me- sometimes it is, sometimes it's way more. (when it's more it shakes my very foundation because it's rare for me.) Overall, though, it doesn't seem to possess the mystical power it seems to have for sexual types. Being cheated on isn't the worst thing someone could do to me, for example- it's way worse when someone no longer cares for my company or cuts me out of their life. I'd say the friendship aspect of a relationship is more important to me than the sexual aspect- not that it isn't important, though- but I'd say I see it more as fun, an aspect of the whole thing rather than something cosmic.