Quote Originally Posted by brainheart View Post
Interesting. I'm curious: what don't you relate to? What sexual instinct descriptions do you relate to? This was what clinched sexual dom for me:
The sexual instinct isn't necessarily sexual. It's the drive for intimacy where sex can be a component of it but isn't the primary drive.

I agree, the social instinct description is problematic. It seems to imply that only humans have the social instinct, which is flat-out wrong. There are social insects, like the honeybee. There are social mammals, like the elephant. Also, there are multitudes of non-social animals who care for their young for extended amounts of time, like bears, cats, and most species of birds (they all have young who are just as helpless when born as newborn humans). In other words, caring for someone beyond yourself- the basis of empathy- must not be the exclusive domain of the social instinct, so it's wrong to sequester it to it.
My point wasn't that there was anything wrong with the description of SO. My point was that the sx description was written from an SO's weird psycho-sexual fixation perspective.

All in all, I think the Riso-Hudson descriptions are the most balanced when it comes to presenting the instincts.
Riso-Hudson and Eclectic Energies are good.