• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

[sx] Sx-doms...come to me ;)

Salomé

meh
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,527
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
For me, my sx nature manifests itself as the selfish desire to know the minds of others. To peel their minds apart and get inside, and to become part of their thoughts. But I'm rather selfish, as I'll do this and give the impression that maybe I'm here to stay forever but that's not guarantee. I'll leave once I'm done with you and I won't feel bad about it if you move out of my life.
I have the same stacking as you (5w4 sx/sp) and I can relate to a lot (though not all ) of what you are saying here.

If I want to know you at all, I want to know you intimately. I want to know what it's like to be you. But that doesn't mean I want intimacy, and it certainly doesn't mean I'm offering any sort of commitment. It's driven by curiosity rather than affection. Sometimes affection happens as a result of that process, if I admire the person, but just as often disillusionment or indifference happens.

I may not be able to hold on to people well, but I don't really need to either.
Was it your intention to dump this guy completely, or were you just preoccupied with new interests? I get the latter, the former I don't really understand. I can't bring myself to dump anyone unless they consistently behave like an asshole.

That said, the neediness thing is wearing. And if someone responded in that way (falling to pieces) I can understand why you would pull back. People who need constant reassurance and interaction become draining. It's actually more selfish to lean on someone in that way, despite what people are saying here. Yes, it might be normal, but that doesn't make it healthy. The healthiest way of being, I think, is much the way you are - open with everyone, not burdening them with your expectations and not allowing them to burden you with theirs. The problem (as someone pointed out to me recently) is that being very self-sufficient, one often attracts deeply needy people, who feed off your strength and try to sap you dry. And if you have issues with guilt, sometimes you allow them to do that for too long and just end up resentful and frustrated.

the INTP-style part of me (vs the SX aspect) very much is capable, especially with other INTPs, of being in intense conversations and deep sharing, yet then separating and not seeing other for long periods of time without much distress or desire to get together even if we had loved being together.

And then as soon as we are within proximity again, it's like we never left.
This is one of the best things about INTPs. Out of sight, doesn't have to mean out of mind. Giving someone the space to move away and do other things without reproaching them for "neglecting" you is healthy. I don't have a problem leaving people behind, because I don't need to have them in front of me all the time for them to matter to me. Once the connection is forged, it's there for good. I think not being needy makes you a better friend. Because I can advise and support the other person unselfishly, without giving any attention to what I might want. If I find myself becoming too attached, it's a signal to pull back, because what I'm actually doing is trying to assert my own desires - to take more than I'm prepared to give.
 

ragashree

Reason vs Being
Joined
Nov 3, 2008
Messages
1,770
MBTI Type
Mine
Enneagram
1w9
^ Interesting post Morgan :thinking:

Enneagram 1 (don't think much of the wing theory) SX/SP. I'm pretty sure that SX is quite dominant over SP. SO doesn't really register at all ;)

I may provide something more detailed later if I feel like it.
 

JocktheMotie

Habitual Fi LineStepper
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
8,491
I have the same stacking as you (5w4 sx/sp) and I can relate to a lot (though not all ) of what you are saying here.

If I want to know you at all, I want to know you intimately. I want to know what it's like to be you. But that doesn't mean I want intimacy, and it certainly doesn't mean I'm offering any sort of commitment. It's driven by curiosity rather than affection. Sometimes affection happens as a result of that process, if I admire the person, but just as often disillusionment or indifference happens.

Yep, I agree that it has to do with my personal curiosity, and when I want to get to know someone it's directly because I enjoy the effect their interaction has on me and would like to follow it up to see how deep it goes.

Was it your intention to dump this guy completely, or were you just preoccupied with new interests? I get the latter, the former I don't really understand. I can't bring myself to dump anyone unless they consistently behave like an asshole.

That said, the neediness thing is wearing. And if someone responded in that way (falling to pieces) I can understand why you would pull back. People who need constant reassurance and interaction become draining. It's actually more selfish to lean on someone in that way, despite what people are saying here. Yes, it might be normal, but that doesn't make it healthy. The healthiest way of being, I think, is much the way you are - open with everyone, not burdening them with your expectations and not allowing them to burden you with theirs. The problem (as someone pointed out to me recently) is that being very self-sufficient, one often attracts deeply needy people, who feed off your strength and try to sap you dry. And if you have issues with guilt, sometimes you allow them to do that for too long and just end up resentful and frustrated.

No, I believe the former takes an active effort that I really don't have the energy/malice for. It was more that I was, like you said, preoccupied with new people and a new environment. So, while I wouldn't have had a problem if two years down the road he had tried to reconnect, the fact that I knew of the reaction he had would have changed how I approached him and the friendship. Sort of like when a child realizes for the first time that he can break his favorite toy. I'd have been too conscious of that new...fragility that I thought he had. Part of me growing up a bit has been identifying how I affect people, and determining where and if I have some kind of responsibility. I don't notice how many people get caught in my wake naturally.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
If I want to know you at all, I want to know you intimately. I want to know what it's like to be you. But that doesn't mean I want intimacy, and it certainly doesn't mean I'm offering any sort of commitment. It's driven by curiosity rather than affection. Sometimes affection happens as a result of that process, if I admire the person, but just as often disillusionment or indifference happens.

That part really struck a chord in me. I'm not sure how SX crosses the full enneagram spectrum of the nine archetypes, but I'm wondering if, in the Fives, it manifests itself like this.

I can show more affection and even feel warm toward someone -- I genuine like people as well as being curious (then again my Four wing is only a few points under the Five) -- but I tend to equate intimacy = knowledge as opposed to some other people who I know define it differently, and there is no commitment aside from our commitment to be honest and open. I just want them to be open with me when we talk, but I don't expect quantities of their time or physical closeness just because they bared all of their secrets to me and me them. I think it has sort of shot me in the foot with other sorts of people, because they see intimacy as something more binding and read my distance as not caring about them as a person.

This is one of the best things about INTPs. Out of sight, doesn't have to mean out of mind. Giving someone the space to move away and do other things without reproaching them for "neglecting" you is healthy. I don't have a problem leaving people behind, because I don't need to have them in front of me all the time for them to matter to me. Once the connection is forged, it's there for good. I think not being needy makes you a better friend. Because I can advise and support the other person unselfishly, without giving any attention to what I might want. If I find myself becoming too attached, it's a signal to pull back, because what I'm actually doing is trying to assert my own desires - to take more than I'm prepared to give.

Yeah, this is one of the things that bit me in the ass during my long relationship with an ISFJ. The expectations were very different, and my need to give and receive autonomy was read as "not caring" or "indifferent" to my partner.

I think nowadays there is some more flex room there. That last sentence of yours above... that was my original feeling in my 20's, but it has become tempered somewhat because I know others expect me to engage more if I am in a committed relationship (such as marriage, or an established friendship), and I'm more flexible on that point... but I am still wary about using someone for my own benefit even accidentally and infringing on their autonomy.

I just recently ended a relationship with an F, and it's funny because I think based on behavior he was looking more for a back and forth thing at the end just to reaffirm I cared about him despite the breakup and while I wanted to be sensitive to that, at the same time I felt a need to be wary about me not letting him go enough; one of the primary contributors to the ending was because I felt too attached to him without the ability to make an official commitment, and I felt it was hindering him from moving on with his life and doing things he frankly needed to get down in order to be happy and successful.

So how I felt didn't matter even if I sensed desires in me for the relationship, it was more about protecting him from any over-attached desires in me, and freeing him and myself in the process... but my desire to stay at least in deep knowledge of him now had to be sacrificed because it hurts him too much to share deeply with me and yet for us not to be together, so he needs space from me and now communication has been sundered.

Just weird seeing it all play out like that as per the discussion.
 

AphroditeGoneAwry

failure to thrive
Joined
Feb 20, 2009
Messages
5,585
MBTI Type
INfj
Enneagram
451
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
I have the same stacking as you (5w4 sx/sp) and I can relate to a lot (though not all ) of what you are saying here.

If I want to know you at all, I want to know you intimately. I want to know what it's like to be you. But that doesn't mean I want intimacy, and it certainly doesn't mean I'm offering any sort of commitment. It's driven by curiosity rather than affection. Sometimes affection happens as a result of that process, if I admire the person, but just as often disillusionment or indifference happens.

That part really struck a chord in me. I'm not sure how SX crosses the full enneagram spectrum of the nine archetypes, but I'm wondering if, in the Fives, it manifests itself like this.

I can show more affection and even feel warm toward someone -- I genuine like people as well as being curious (then again my Four wing is only a few points under the Five) -- but I tend to equate intimacy = knowledge as opposed to some other people who I know define it differently, and there is no commitment aside from our commitment to be honest and open.

I don't know. You INTPs are all saying the same thing (Jock included), so it makes me wonder if it's not more a T vs F thing. For me, the intimacy is more important then the knowledge, which seems very much like an F sentiment. Also, I have tested 5w4 a lot, and cannot really relate to what you are saying on a heartfelt level, although I get it in theory, and have had snippets of it from time to time.

Or, perhaps, it's also partly the diff between SX/SO and SX/SP. ?
 

Tallulah

Emerging
Joined
Feb 19, 2008
Messages
6,009
MBTI Type
INTP
Hmm, this is all very interesting. As an sp/so/sx, I think I have instinctively been very wary and mistrustful of sx doms most of my life. Especially sx/sp, because they don't do the social dance of getting to know you casually first, and don't really care about social conventions. I have a better time with T sx/sp doms, though, because they are mainly interested in my ideas, rather than mining my personal life and emotions. I'll share my ideas with any intelligent person that I don't find repulsive or boring. No big deal if we're not besties afterward. But if someone digs into my actual life, asking lots of personal questions and trying to dig into my feelings, a big wall goes up. I'm not sharing that stuff with folks who aren't my actual friends, or who aren't sticking around.

I can relate to Jock's story, though. I think it has a lot to do with being young, and a lot to do with being INTP. We don't form emotional connections with our friends at young ages, as a whole.

I remember being completely baffled around graduation time when everyone was just sobbing because high school was over and everyone was anticipating missing everyone else. It seemed fake to me because it wasn't anything I was feeling. I figured I'd see the people I wanted to see, and didn't really care about seeing anyone else. I realize now that the feelings were genuine to them, but it was so foreign to me at the time.

And INTPs definitely do the thing where if you're our friend, we don't have to be in each other's faces all the time. I'm really learning to try and bridge the gap with my F friends who have different emotional requirements for their friendships. But it's something I've kind of JUST NOW clued into, and I'm in my 30s.
 

CzeCze

RETIRED
Joined
Sep 11, 2007
Messages
8,975
MBTI Type
GONE
To me, being so dependent on a person as to have that reaction when they are gone, is fragility.

And therefore human. :)

I have to echo Aphrodite's sentiment of being wary of SX's, particularly after reading more here on SX/SP's. I remember Jock reading about your friend in question (at least, I think it's the same friend in question) in a much earlier post and my initial reaction honestly was kinda horrified.

I thought being SX would create more empathy or sympathy for others and understanding about the universal human need for connection and the concept of trust but in the way it has been described (at least partly) in the SX (SX/SP ?) orientation sounds like it can be frankly vampiric.

I know that even as some kind of SX/SO combo myself I crave intimacy but I have been extremely taken aback in the past by people who seem not to care about personal boundaries or who push regardless of my obvious discomfort or reticence. The sense I got was that these people would violate my boundaries or trust but not necessarily in a malicious way, more that they are completely unaware and therefore do not care about how I feel about the matter. They are driven purely by personal curiousity.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
And therefore human. :)

I have to echo Aphrodite's sentiment of being wary of SX's, particularly after reading more here on SX/SP's. I remember Jock reading about your friend in question (at least, I think it's the same friend in question) in a much earlier post and my initial reaction honestly was kinda horrified.

I thought being SX would create more empathy or sympathy for others and understanding about the universal human need for connection and the concept of trust but in the way it has been described (at least partly) in the SX (SX/SP ?) orientation sounds like it can be frankly vampiric.

I know that even as some kind of SX/SO combo myself I crave intimacy but I have been extremely taken aback in the past by people who seem not to care about personal boundaries or who push regardless of my obvious discomfort or reticence. The sense I got was that these people would violate my boundaries or trust but not necessarily in a malicious way, more that they are completely unaware and therefore do not care about how I feel about the matter. They are driven purely by personal curiousity.

I think a public service message should apply to ANY type of person, thank you very much. It's not what we are per se, it's our own personal morality and how we treat others that determines whether or not we end up abusing or taking advantage of other people. Anyone of any type in any system can be dangerous in relationships.

I think if you sense someone pushing past your boundaries and they're not responding to any pushback you're giving them, then you need to slam them to a halt and put the blast doors in place, all typing aside.
 

MacGuffin

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
10,710
MBTI Type
xkcd
Enneagram
9w1
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I thought being SX would create more empathy or sympathy for others and understanding about the universal human need for connection and the concept of trust but in the way it has been described (at least partly) in the SX (SX/SP ?) orientation sounds like it can be frankly vampiric.

Yes, emotional vampire is a big pitfall for sx/sp, I'd say.
 

Salomé

meh
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,527
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
^Disagree. Unless it's found in association with the DICK type.
:nerd:
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Some of us just drink animal blood, to avoid taking human life. :)
(But it doesn't taste as good...)
 

Salomé

meh
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,527
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
There's nothing intrinsically sinister about sx-dominance. It's just sp paranoia that is interpreting it in that way. I associate my selfish tendencies more with my sp side, actually. If it wasn't for my sxyness, I wouldn't reach out to other people at all.

Pitfalls are more likely to be these:
Sx/Sp - Likely to neglect their desire to maintain physical safety, comfort, and an orderly lifestyle for the sake of their primary concern of seeking intense connections and experiences. May not have an awareness of the need to connect in a broader sense with the world, of a sense of security or in groups or of the need to seek it, or even of the need to foster approval, support, and understanding of themselves within groups they are connected with, often causing misunderstandings with allies, supporters, friends, and family members.
 

Lavos

New member
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
17
MBTI Type
ENTP
sx/sp here



As an sp/so/sx, I think I have instinctively been very wary and mistrustful of sx doms most of my life.

Why?

Especially sx/sp, because they don't do the social dance of getting to know you casually first, and don't really care about social conventions.

Is this a bad thing ?

But if someone digs into my actual life, asking lots of personal questions and trying to dig into my feelings, a big wall goes up. I'm not sharing that stuff with folks who aren't my actual friends, or who aren't sticking around.


What is more important in your opinion: that somebody 'sticks around', or that they can be trusted (to not divulge whatever information you shared, etc)?


I have to echo Aphrodite's sentiment of being wary of SX's, particularly after reading more here on SX/SP's.

I thought being SX would create more empathy or sympathy for others and understanding about the universal human need for connection and the concept of trust but in the way it has been described (at least partly) in the SX (SX/SP ?) orientation sounds like it can be frankly vampiric.

Could you please point to examples that have caused you to increase your 'wariness' of sx/sp types posted on this thread? Please be specific.

I know that even as some kind of SX/SO combo myself I crave intimacy but I have been extremely taken aback in the past by people who seem not to care about personal boundaries or who push regardless of my obvious discomfort or reticence. The sense I got was that these people would violate my boundaries or trust but not necessarily in a malicious way, more that they are completely unaware and therefore do not care about how I feel about the matter. They are driven purely by personal curiousity.

(Not adressing your post in particular) I don't think that publicly berating an entire enneagram instinctual stacking, unloading past frustration over relationship screw-ups is the way to go (and not even knowing if these people belonged to said stacking, not to mention too many other factors), because in the same way somebody could say, for example, that all sx-lasters are shallow as hell. Will it be true for all the cases?
 

Tallulah

Emerging
Joined
Feb 19, 2008
Messages
6,009
MBTI Type
INTP

Well, partly because, as an sp/so/sx, intense emotional connections are difficult for me and not something I forge with just anyone. Certainly not someone who is bored at a party and wants to go poking around in my psyche or my emotions. I'm not going to make the effort if I don't know the person is sincerely befriending me. Unless I'm just in a weird confessional mood, or unless it's a total stranger I know I'll never run into again. That happens sometimes, too. But those are rare exceptions.

Like I said, poke around in my head all you want. But stay out of my personal life.

Is this a bad thing ?

It is for me. It just irks me and makes me throw up walls. It makes me feel like, "who the hell are you?" Again, there can be exceptions.


What is more important in your opinion: that somebody 'sticks around', or that they can be trusted (to not divulge whatever information you shared, etc)?

Both are equally important if I'm going to share pieces of myself that most people don't see. Being trusted gets the edge, but I also need to know that they're not just entertaining themselves and running. I would feel a bit used.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I think the reason the conversation is getting touchy is because we don't wear "variant titles" on our forehead or use them to introduce ourselves to others, yet now people are making lots of judgments based on variants (well, just the SX variant here... I haven't bothered to scour the other two threads to see if people are raising as much stink there about SO & SP types).

How often do we hear, "Hi, I'm Caliope, I'm SX/sp, would you share with me your deepest most painful personal memory so I can mull over it deeply at night and savor it while never speaking to you again, leaving you feeling ashamed and violated? Great, thanks!"

I mean, the thing is that you meet someone and you don't KNOW their variant, you just decide in the moment whether they feel trustworthy or not to you... and if they don't, you don't share, and if they're socially conscious, they don't push... and if they do push and you're uncomfortable, then you put up a wall or get away from them.

It's all very straightforward and has nothing to do with knowing for sure anyone's variant reading whatsoever!

I mean, we're talking about people who would treat others as commodities, which occurs no matter WHAT variant we're discussing. You probably have talked to numerous SX people already (since there are only three basic variants) and thought nothing of us... because despite being SX variant, we actually know how to behave like human beings in terms of monitoring our interactions with others, like any other variant. The deficiency is in the individual, not the type.

SO people are capable of exploiting others for social gain and prestige and networking prowess -- I bet we all have had people network with us, and some of them leave a bad taste in our mouths and some we actually feel positive toward even if we know part of the reason they're interacting with us is to network.

Same thing with SP people.

SX people might be driven by curiousity or "connection through knowledge" or some other variation of that, but it doesn't mean we don't give a damn about the people we're talking to or that the totality of all we are is cosmic vampires, voyeurs, or whatever else. We interact with people as individuals, not as variants. It seems like people only get labeled as their variant (and we bother to care) if they happen to do something wrong.

As far as the rest goes, frankly, small talk always seemed shallow to me. it was all fluff and air, making "fake relationships." I felt like people who said hi to me didn't really give a damn about me, they were just playing along with the social conventions. Or that they didn't have a worthwhile thought in their head worth sharing since all they could discuss was surface details. It took me years to learn how to small talk and actually see value in it, to the point in enjoying it -- it's another way to make a connection with someone who you don't know well, nor can know well in the situation you're in... where deeper conversation is inappropriate or too much.

I want to really know what makes someone tick, but I try very hard to be non-intrusive and non-clingy, and I also usually share deep things about myself first and give other people an option to respond or not... and if they don't, I don't pry. But I take the first risk; I habitually bare myself first, before asking anyone else to. SX has its place and can lead to people being able to talk about things that mean a lot to them or that they might not get to voice much of them time, so that they might feel known.
 

Tallulah

Emerging
Joined
Feb 19, 2008
Messages
6,009
MBTI Type
INTP
Well said, Jennifer. It's true; we just react to the individual and their manner. And I should maybe point out that Jennifer is a perfect example of an sx dominant that I have no problems at all sharing things with. I know I can trust her, and I know she cares about people. All my interactions with her and observations of her confirm my initial gut reaction to her when I first came here. So, no, SXs are not the devil, but a bit of social finesse and showing others you are sensitive to their own boundaries does help. :p

As an SP, what I have to watch is offending people by not feeling the need to engage them in the first place. It took me a zillion years to realize why others might be hurt by my not responding affirmatively to their invitations or hanging out by the water cooler or whatever. In my head, I was just conserving energy and feeling like if I didn't see anything in common with them, they probably realized it too, with no harm done. So that's something I had to work on consciously.
 

runvardh

にゃん
Joined
Jun 23, 2007
Messages
8,541
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Heh, emotional vampire... more than I like to be, but less than I have been. I have often hid my SX be hind SP due to many of the results. It's not easy wanting to consume and be consumed while needing quiet time, being somewhat distant publicly, and needing to feel safe. I do try, though; work on the balance points, give and take, offer my loyalty (as much as people constantly spit on it :steam:). And as much as I want a safe place, I want to be one as well. Perhaps I'm just silly and naive...
 

Uytuun

New member
Joined
Apr 19, 2008
Messages
1,633
MBTI Type
nnnn
Emotional vampirism...how would you say it works?

Doesn't sound silly to me, kitteh.
 

runvardh

にゃん
Joined
Jun 23, 2007
Messages
8,541
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Emotional vampirism...how would you say it works?

Doesn't sound silly to me, kitteh.

The kind that I tend to end up with is when I end up picking up the mood of the person nearest me or most diretly interacting with. Other times I'll take on the mood of what ever group I'm in, which can be very overwhelming. One example where I'd be concously using it for my benefit would be going to the bar when I'm meh in order to soak up the silliness from the people around me. As long as I only interact with the bartender or a few random people for short periods of time, I'm good. Too much, too close in, though just drives me crazy.

Latching on, and sucking a person dry, which I think is what the others are talking about, I try to avoid doing that; but even running at medium or a little lower I still have some people feeling I'm a little too intense which may end up being rather draining for them. It's tough, but what other way can I use to determine which way I deal with them...
 
Top