[sx] Sx-Blind Sadness

[mentalbrot]

Sx-Blind Sadness (oops ignore this one)

I just am a little curious about the reaction some sx blinds have upon realizing their stacking. For some, they are saddened and it just interested me because the reaction is unlike those of the other two blindspots. If this was the case for you, could you explain a little bit about why you felt this way?
I know in some cases, a few have expressed fears of being forever alone (but I don't think this makes a lot of sense as the majority of people are sx blind) or of not being able to find fulfillment in relationships (again...I think that actually having sx could increase awareness in this domain). If you, as a sx-blind, had never come across the instinctual variant theory, would you have even realized your blindness to sx?
For other cases, I know there are some who come to the realization with flippance, already aware that they don't place much value on sx. If you are in this camp and want to share, that would also be cool.
[I was just pondering on this, because, like a good contraflow, some days I would rather not have my auxiliary instinct. I also grew up alongside a lot of spso individuals and it bothers me that I still have such a disconnect in understanding their motivations beyond a superficial level.]

 

[fatgurl]

I think it stems from the descriptions of sx blinds online. "cold, dry, dispassionate, boring, nothing behind the eyes" are some of the descriptions I've seen. Also, people are puzzled as to how sx blinds could ever bond on a deeper level. Honestly, it makes no sense. Sx blinds are still humans so I don't see why they wouldn't be able to do those things.
I do think that if some people never found out they were sx blind then they wouldn't care. But once again, the descriptions are always negative. Sx users are seen as cool and hot, even if some are horrible people, they look cool while doing it. Sx blinds don't.

I think anyone who is sx blind should ignore a lot of descriptions of sx blinds since it really only serves to discourage them.

 

[RadicalDoubt]

I am in the latter camp, as what initially made me think of myself as sx blind where a lot of the negative stereotypes attached to it (ie. many sx blinds aren't shallow or empty, but especially when I got into enneagram I was very connected to seeing myself in the negative this way). There wasn't a lot of room for denial in my case, as I am very stereotypically sx blind and sp/so (though friends have suggested sp/sx on occasion irl I guess just because I'm a strong introvert).

I can't pretend that when I figured out my full type (ISFJ 9w1 sp/so), I did look into other stackings because the combination was so "bland and common," in low points when I didn't catch myself identifying too much with the theory, sx blindness in addition to this seemed to undermine all the difficulties I've had identifying and connecting with others. Sx blindness is just "so normal," if I were such a normal type, why would I struggle being so different and disconnected from culture? Of course I've never been able to maintain such a mindset since identification is not something I do often or can maintain usually, but I think a lot of people within the theory struggling to identify with their sx blindness can fall into such a mindset. Generally speaking, I've found a lot of people who have struggled with others tend to struggle initially identifying themselves as sx blind and not soc blind in particular, especially when sx is sometimes framed in descriptions as being vastly superior, alluring, and passionate comparatively to the other instincts. There is a tendency to project personal problems into personality theories, and it's notable that a lot of people don't want to be grouped with people that they have an aversion to. Others misinterpret sx blindness to imply that they are uninteresting, lacking intensity or depth, "just like everyone else," or even incapable of passion and connection in the way that sx users are not which I find to be very strange as well since, again, sx blindness is the most common stackings by a decent margin. It really seems to come down to the fact that the descriptions are poorly framed and that people in general tend to have an issue identifying with their flaws.

 

[Earl Grey]

My response to this will not answer the question, but will answer why I don't react the way OP describes.

I think folks are too prone to seeing a type, any type, as they are experienced by the author or someone else.

"I can't be [X], that person said it's boring," doesn't make too much sense.

Rephrasing it makes it more obviously wacky- imagine this:
"I can't like the avengers, my friend said it's boring,"
"I can't wear black, my cousin said it's boring,"
"I can't be a dog person, my neighbour said they're boring," - that really doesn't make sense. This extends to any shorthand descriptions any other type uses. Just because you are a certain type, it does not necessarily mean you will absolutely be a certain way, let alone be interpret and received that way.

A generalised conclusion someone makes about a theory can conclude that something is boring, exciting, whatever all they want but they can't actually speak for what you've done, what you've been through, who you are, and how you actually have experienced something for yourself. They have no way of knowing that. If the theory fits, it fits. How you actually use it- who you are as a person, what you've achieved, what you do, is something different in entirely. Let yourself and whoever gets to actually experience you be the judge of what kind of person you are, be it so/sp or sp/so, sp/sx or sx/sp, sx/so or so/sx, or whatever it is.