• 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] What is it really like to be sexual last?

Cimarron

IRL is not real
Joined
Aug 21, 2008
Messages
3,417
MBTI Type
ISTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
I know this isn’t likely to win me any points, but I really do think sx primaries – in general – are probably likely to seek out sex with more frequency than other stackings – in general (followed - in general - by sx secondaries). Of course exceptions will abound. But I'm speaking generally.

Because:

1. Sex is a lot of things, but one of the things sex is, is a way of connecting with another person one-on-one, and that is a preoccupation of sx primaries.
2. Sx primaries are usually seeking high levels of intensity and stimulation, and the literature says they are prone to using sex for this.

Saying this does not mean:

1. That other stackings value sex less.
2. That other stackings have “low” sex drives.
3. That other stackings aren’t sensual.
4. That other stackings aren’t musical (figured I’d throw that in, due to being like wtf?)
Well, thinking more on it, even though sex drive isn't a problem for me (maybe TMI), it's true that I have an uneasy, conflicting relationship with the intimate aspects of sex/sexual activities. "Want it but don't want it," or maybe "Want it until I'm face-to-face with it," typical reaction I have to intimacy in other parts of my life. However, I see your point that if you're less open to intimacy, you might seek sex less. Then again, maybe it's not even that, it just means the two types are seeing sex differently. But PeaceBaby's experiences don't bear that out...Hmm. :thinking:
 

FDG

pathwise dependent
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
5,903
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
7w8
I'm one data point: sx-last, never particularly sex driven, especially in terms of intimacy, but sex is pretty cool.

Well, for example, when you talk with (mildly attractive) women don't you imagine them naked, at least once in a while?
 
G

garbage

Guest
Well, for example, when you talk with (mildly attractive) women don't you imagine them naked, at least once in a while?
Oh, definitely.

Incidentally, I work on a college campus. Y'all can do the math :newwink:
 

1487610420

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 13, 2009
Messages
6,431
I'm one data point: sx-last, never particularly sex driven, especially in terms of intimacy, but sex is pretty cool.

Me too. :ninja:
 

skylights

i love
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
7,756
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
Nope! People is people, man, and we deal accordingly. I had to learn the value of one-on-one intimacy, and we both had to maintain our patience as we figured one another out.

I'm glad you guys are able to work with it so well! I imagine that you balance either other out nicely.

I asked mainly because I have a friend who had a relationship this summer that I think crashed and burned quite badly mainly because of connection issues that can be illustrated through variant stacking. She is quite So/Sp, and he was definitely Sx-dom from what I could tell. She expresses strong resistance to intimacy - even after being very close friends for 6 years, I still have to prompt her or she will not share the quiet details. As for she and him, they met casually, dated casually, and slept together casually before he finished whatever he was involved in and moved back to his home state. I suspect she figured it would wane from there, while he figured that distance was just an obstacle to overcome. So at some point he decided to travel around 1,200 miles to visit her for a week, and figured she would take off work to be with him. When she didn't, he was upset, and she, of course, increasingly pulled away as he increasingly applied more intimacy far too quickly for her comfort level. She tolerated him for the duration of the visit, diplomatic Fe-dom that she is (plus there was good sex, at least), then broke it off.

Now, given, she and I are close, and I'm Sx/So to her So/Sp, and I think that middle ground of So makes it easy, because that's where we tend to stay. I'll push Sx sometimes, and she'll retreat Sp, but for the most part it's smooth So sailing - both looking out at the world together, rather than looking at the quality of the connection with the other (Sx) or at both of your stability and wellbeing (Sp). I think that part of being Sx is that your partner's qualities have a huge impact on your life, since you spend a lot of time cultivating that connection - so it's interesting for me to watch how she as an Sx-last navigates relationships, because I think she does less "melding", less seeking connection, and more "including", or creating camaraderie, in her relationships... while I think my Sp-dom "provides" as a way of altering his life to create a desirable relationship. So the relationships take on different qualities. It's interesting to see how those differences play out.

If anyone has anything to say on how relationships with Sx-lasts may tend to be unique, I would be curious.

Of course, maybe there is little difference in some relationships, but I feel like for my friend, being Sx-last mostly means that intimacy in her relationships is going to need to be developed slowly and carefully - which is at least very different from my own relationship needs, as I would have a very hard time considering a launching relationship without a depth of intimacy first. Where our variants could easily overlap (as in, how So/Sp and Sx/So could easily build a relationship), I think, is if we had a long duration of friendship and trust first, which allowed intimacy to grow over time (but I imagine for an Sx-dom that would mean a whole lot of unrequited crushing for a long time!) She's recently been tracked down by a new suitor, and she's already put the brakes on. However, they have a fair amount of history together, and he's expressed being willing to let her pace the relationship, so I think that prognosis is looking a lot better than the summer already.
 

mrcockburn

Aquaria
Joined
Jan 3, 2010
Messages
1,896
MBTI Type
¥¤
Enneagram
3w4
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
I wanted to add how much I agree with this statement. I try to be understanding that others have different mindsets, but I can't help but experience it as selfishness when people feel everyone else around them should accept their confrontational behavior and/or brooding.

What really gets me is when people not only think that I should stick around and tolerate their confrontational behavior and brooding...but when they think I have some real audacity for requesting personal space and respect for my boundaries.

Apparently I'm supposed to not only accept, but appreciate invasive behavior.

No thanks.
 

Sunny Ghost

New member
Joined
May 28, 2010
Messages
2,396
Maybe I'm completely wrong about my instincts, but so far I agree with nothing anyone has said.

As a sp/so, I like to be around people but I don't necessarily like interacting with them. Going to movies and concerts or taking a ride in a bus are all very enjoyable things for me because I get to be around others and hear their conversations and see how they act, but I get to be by myself and not have to talk to them or do anything for them.
Except this. I understand this. I had always figured it was an introverted thing. I prefer one to one interactions and am most talkative in these types of settings. But sometimes I want to just be around someone, without the exhausting talking part.

It's like having a low libido and read at bed next to Pamela Anderson, drinking tea. You look like you are gay while you are not.
I certainly don't have a low libido.

I like Southern Kross' response. :yes: With exceptions being that I'm not inoffensively neutral, and I'm totally fine with being probed and grilled... keeping in mind that I'm very good at detaching myself from answers to probing questions, and by that I mean that I can be very matter-of-fact about (some of) my emotions and talk about them from an outsider's perspective. (I have an ENFP friend who is the same way.) I can have great, intense conversations with Sx-doms as long as they don't expect me to "open up" and talk about my insecurities. I can hear about their insecurities and be fine as long as I remain detached.

Regarding Owfin's response to Southern Kross' post: I also don't define myself as being all that detached, but friends of mine have told me that I'm not nearly as emotionally open as I feel like I am. I think it's because, on a scale from detachment to openness, the line where I start to feel uncomfortable and self-conscious is much closer to detachment than the average line... if that makes sense.

I think I agree with this? When I have very intimate/intense one-on-one interactions with someone, in which both of us feel and express that intensity (as opposed to intense interactions where one of us is intense and the other tries to respond rationally/reasonably/detached-ly), I also feel sad, as well as exhausted, because I'm so bad at having those conversations that my level of discomfort borders on traumatic.
I prefer to have real conversations, one on one, than to have shallow conversations in a group. Group settings can make me uneasy.

Oh, I'm an animated person too; I didn't mean to say that I'm not interesting at all (that is, I think I'm interesting anyway :newwink:). I meant more that I don't tend to inspire strong feelings in others; neither positive or negative. People don't particularly hate me nor love me to bits. I seem to lack the je ne sais quois that people typically look for. I never feel like others are really keen to have me around; mostly they just don't mind me being there and for this reason I'm often overlooked.
I can relate to this. Maybe it's my insecurity talking, but I tend to feel as though I don't inspire strong feelings in others, unless the observer is able to see beneath the surface.

It's having issues with being out of touch with your sensuality.

You know that someone is Sx-last when you have a hard time to imagine them having sex and see this as a concrete and serious option, when you imagine them having sex it's looks weird and even laughable because it seems completely out of context with theses people.

Intensity and intimacy are treated like a bibelot in a cupboard, somethink wich is separated from your body, that you don't feel the energy deeply implanted in your guts, from this perserpective it seems like an ornament, really marvelous at times, but looks artificial and unnecessary at first.
IDK about this. I don't feel like I'm the type of person someone looks at and thinks, "Wow, this person needs a good f*** to set her straight." Unless I actually have been without sex for a long time and become wound up. I feel like I walk the line between beauty/sexy and modesty. I'm also flirtatious.

I would often feel a slight lingering sense of sorrow upon another individual initiating a private conversation with me on a personal level.
Not at all. I tend to always think well of others, even when I see the faults. And I love getting to know others beneath the surface level.

I suppose once you get behind my friendly, easy-going, agreeable facade, I seem detached and not all that warm. I'm not good at being probed or grilled and will give a shallow answer to avoid a question if I feel uncomfortable. I dislike when people fail to restrain their emotions in public or generally cannot/will not attempt adapt/edit extreme behaviour to suit the situation. I like the idea of intimacy but mostly I feel rather awkward about giving and receiving it. I'm not good with affection or letting people know that I care and struggle to connect with others with real depth. I feel deeply and passionately but do not show any signs of this externally. I suppose I seem calm, even-tempered,and laid-back. There is an inoffensive neutrality about me that perhaps can make me seem dull or bland. I am not the sort of person that people find charismatic or compelling to listen to.
I like intimacy. I'm just more private about it. And even with strangers, I can be incredibly candid, charming and open about myself. Albeit bashful, self deprecating, and awkward. I feel like I constantly teeter between holding in and exploding out when with others.
 

EJCC

The Devil of TypoC
Joined
Aug 29, 2008
Messages
19,129
MBTI Type
ESTJ
Enneagram
1w9
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
[MENTION=10131]IndyAnnaJoan[/MENTION]: It's worth noting that I thought I was sx-last when I posted here -- so it would make sense for you not to relate to my so/sx experience.

Can't speak for everybody else though. :shrug:
 

Sunny Ghost

New member
Joined
May 28, 2010
Messages
2,396
[MENTION=10131]IndyAnnaJoan[/MENTION]: It's worth noting that I thought I was sx-last when I posted here -- so it would make sense for you not to relate to my so/sx experience.

Can't speak for everybody else though. :shrug:
I actually think it may be more of a type difference.
 

EJCC

The Devil of TypoC
Joined
Aug 29, 2008
Messages
19,129
MBTI Type
ESTJ
Enneagram
1w9
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
I actually think it may be more of a type difference.
Oh, totally -- but I'm just saying, my posts in here are essentially worthless as evidence of sx-last thinking. So there's little reason for any sx-last folks here to agree with me on sx-last topics.

You're right, though, that Fi-last vs first is another big factor.
 

Oaky

Travelling mind
Joined
Jan 15, 2009
Messages
6,180
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Not at all. I tend to always think well of others, even when I see the faults. And I love getting to know others beneath the surface level.
I believe you've very much misunderstood me if you think I'm talking about how I think of another individual if they initiate a conversation with me.
 
R

Riva

Guest
I would often feel a slight lingering sense of sorrow upon another individual initiating a private conversation with me on a personal level.
I think i've witnessed this on numerous occasions. You are so cute oaky. Heh heh he. I wonder how you would react if a female you are attracted to tries to initiate conversation with you in a level you've described above? Maybe if people keep quiet around you, you would take the initiative?
 

Oaky

Travelling mind
Joined
Jan 15, 2009
Messages
6,180
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Apparently I have. Do you care to elaborate?
An individual is not a conversation. A conversation is when you're put within the bounds of a certain type of communication. One that I find difficult and restricting especially if they are personal. Such restrictions are taxing and give a claustrophobic effect. The individual doesn't matter to me in regards to this, and my thoughts regarding him/her is a very different matter. I may find such issues speaking to family members, friends or acquaintances though it does not make me think less of them to wish to have a conversation with me and/or to initiate it. It is well understood that people have different styles of communication and if I were to judge them on it, it'd regard a simplicity of my mind.
 

Noll

New member
Joined
Oct 12, 2013
Messages
705
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp
I usually find it kinda weird when guys in my class talk to me about masturbation and girls they want to have sex with, it's like, well I don't even know what to respond to that! It's even more awkward when they ask ME questions about it, I usually just say (next to) nothing and it gets even weirder. They have such boring taste too. I wouldn't say I'm asexual or anything, I just suck at coming across as 'sensational' or 'intimate', there's a cold, reserved aura about me. I usually just stand in a corner, talking to no one, wondering if someone will ever arrive to rescue me somehow. Believe me when I say I'm a romantic person though, it's just that I have an impenetrable and insignificant exterior.
 
B

brainheart

Guest
[MENTION=20005]Noll[/MENTION] and [MENTION=10131]IndyAnnaJoan[/MENTION],

I've come around to the point of view that I don't think you can separate instinct from etype in a way that you will 'totally relate' to people of the same instinct but different etype. Enneatype affects the instinct so much that the flavor is really different. For example, as a sx/sp 4w5 I'm for the most part reserved, and I would never talk about masturbation and sex with people in a class- talk about tacky- but if it's the right person, I will want to share everything. I have a definite off/on switch. So in many ways, Noll, I relate to what you say, but not in the ways that differentiate our instincts.
 

skylights

i love
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
7,756
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
A few thoughts...

One, a follow-up on the situation I mentioned in 126: unfortunately, that relationship ended too. Sort of. She's in the middle of grad school, but he moved hours away for a job and told her he didn't expect her to wait for him. Me being who I am, I struggle to even comprehend that amount of ambiguity and lack of closure, but that's where that situation is now. I really feel for my friend especially because I know she's probably repressing a lot of hurt right now.

Two, my boyfriend and I have discussed the variants a bit, and while I thought he was sp/sx, he believes and I am agreeing that he is better described as sp/so. I hesitated to identify him as such because 9 sp/so descriptions seem to illustrate a "doormat" type, which he is not at all. He's very independent and has strong personal boundaries, and asserts them when he feels the need. Still, in terms of instinct, he really does attend to self-protection/resources first, then social bonds/environment, with chemistry/intimacy being allowed to be priority once the other two are met.

Assuming this is true... it is interesting... because to me he clearly is a "sexy" person, even though he is rarely sexual, if that makes sense. He's definitely a cocky flirt sometimes, and my coworkers say that he's attractive. When he speaks to a crowd, he is energized and engaging, but also confident and steady. He says he's bad at responding to affection... he's just not particularly gushy about it. Like, I can see that he is happy when I am affectionate towards him, so that is plenty affirmation for me, but it's true that he doesn't tend to respond in kind. He is affable and friendly, though - very Fe. It takes a lot of energy on his part to be emotionally effusive. He also has a hard time opening up about very private matters, especially struggle. He says it's stressful and unpleasant to feel vulnerable, even with me.

So, for him, if sp/so is accurate... He does enjoy intimacy but requires a lot of energy to initiate/maintain it; it's hard for him to demonstrate affection; it's hard for him to demonstrate vulnerability; he doesn't tend to seek intensity, but may enjoy it in doses if it presents itself; he enjoys being amidst lots of people but interacting with few; he dislikes when people fail to restrain themselves when situationally appropriate. But he definitely does feel deeply, desire and enjoy intimacy, and desire and enjoy sex. The difference is that he will get the other domains of his life in order first, and tends to see this domain as less of a necessity and more of an indulgence.

SD45T-2 said:
Why not so/sp?

Wow, sorry I'm only a year late on this reply. Not so/sp because she doesn't really strike me as Social-dom. She's an ISTJ 1w9, I'm pretty sure, and I've known her since high school. She's always pretty quiet, keeps to herself, usually is jostled into going out by others. She tends to go out just with a friend or two and tends to avoid big groups. Recently she went home early from her own birthday party at a bar because she wasn't enjoying it because some other girl was being a drama queen. I suppose it's possible she's so/sp but I feel like sp/so is more likely.
 

Chad of the OttomanEmpire

Give me a fourth dot.
Joined
Jun 9, 2013
Messages
1,053
MBTI Type
NeTi
Enneagram
478
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
This is directed toward the thread at large, not any specific individuals:

You have to be careful about distinguishing between the characteristics of the instincts and the characteristics of the types themselves. I doubt I am sx-last, yet I can identify with much that other sx-lasts are saying--I doubt people find me interesting; I've got a shell of reserve; I don't have this sparkling charismatic personality. Actually, I am anti-charismatic. I often don't really get to "know" people, largely because they don't really care to know me or would sooner keep the relationship superficial. I'm a 4w5 and this the reality of being of this core type--even being a likely Ne-dom doesn't do much to improve this.

And, sometimes, you can have the "anti" manifestation of the instinct itself--you avoid the dictates of your dominant instinct and scorn others who appear to partake of it. "Anti-social socials" are the most common example of this; likewise the sexual instinct isn't all about "having sex" and "being desirable". It's actually about being neurotic about these issues, as well as seeking a "charge" (which may not be literally sexual at all).

I think sx-last is more about not feeling the need to get to know people (or interests) in great depth; not feeling compelled to "get closer and closer" with chosen object of interest. I think it's more about "sticking to business" instead of following your life's passions. You might be an exciting, interesting person, but at some level, really seeking out deeper levels of intimacy (not sexual intimacy) or that "charge" is just not a priority.
 

Sunny Ghost

New member
Joined
May 28, 2010
Messages
2,396
This is directed toward the thread at large, not any specific individuals:

You have to be careful about distinguishing between the characteristics of the instincts and the characteristics of the types themselves. I doubt I am sx-last, yet I can identify with much that other sx-lasts are saying--I doubt people find me interesting; I've got a shell of reserve; I don't have this sparkling charismatic personality. Actually, I am anti-charismatic. I often don't really get to "know" people, largely because they don't really care to know me or would sooner keep the relationship superficial. I'm a 4w5 and this the reality of being of this core type--even being a likely Ne-dom doesn't do much to improve this.

And, sometimes, you can have the "anti" manifestation of the instinct itself--you avoid the dictates of your dominant instinct and scorn others who appear to partake of it. "Anti-social socials" are the most common example of this; likewise the sexual instinct isn't all about "having sex" and "being desirable". It's actually about being neurotic about these issues, as well as seeking a "charge" (which may not be literally sexual at all).

I think sx-last is more about not feeling the need to get to know people (or interests) in great depth; not feeling compelled to "get closer and closer" with chosen object of interest. I think it's more about "sticking to business" instead of following your life's passions. You might be an exciting, interesting person, but at some level, really seeking out deeper levels of intimacy (not sexual intimacy) or that "charge" is just not a priority.

Great description.
 
Top