[sx] Why are sx-doms so common in typology communities?

[1487610420]

Dude this is good! All this means is that you have a high accuracy rate. I become surprised when people do understand me haha.

 

[Starry]

I understand you perfectly. I know what you are up to, and you won’t get away with it!

OMG and here...all along...I thought no one especially you understood me. All I can say is that you have done an extraordinary and I mean extraordinary job of acting like you don’t have a freakin clue as to what I say. Wow I am totally blown away right now.

 

[Peter Deadpan]

I understand you perfectly. I know what you are up to, and you won’t get away with it!

OMG and here...all along...I thought no one especially you understood me. All I can say is that you have done an extraordinary and I mean extraordinary job of acting like you don’t have a freakin clue as to what I say. Wow I am totally blown away right now.

I mean... I feel like you guys are soulmates or something. Just look at this chemistry. Who wants the bracelet with the left side of the heart, and who wants the one with the right? Or should we just stick to matching BFF pendants?

 

[1487610420]

I mean... I feel like you guys are soulmates or something. Just look at this chemistry. Who wants the bracelet with the left side of the heart, and who wants the one with the right? Or should we just stick to matching BFF pendants?

 

[Avocado]

OMG and here...all along...I thought no one especially you understood me. All I can say is that you have done an extraordinary and I mean extraordinary job of acting like you don’t have a freakin clue as to what I say. Wow I am totally blown away right now.

Ha. You know I’m just messing with you.

I get awfully bored sometimes. Everywhere is kind of the same all over, but you’ve traveled the world, so you know what I mean.

 

[Luminous]

On the forum at least, it's seen as a 'positive' trait simply because so-ness is typically associated with joining clubs, having a wide social network, and other such group-oriented things, and some of the most common things spoken of in sx threads is the desire of 'connecting deeply', soulmates, intimacy, and so on - so it creates the impression (whether accurate or not) that sx= desire for intimacy, and thus so- people do not have that desire or facet and are instead immersed in social media and networking.

I figured. Sounds like extreme memefication honestly, something like how some self-typed INT- would use their own type descriptions to explain away/make excuses for their poor social skills, but in a way that tries to make it sound like a shining gold badge of pride to cover up insecurity. When viewed that way, I can't see it as anything less than pathetic, and those who perpetuate are really giving their own type a bad rep.

It needs to die. No really, nothing special about it, if this is really all it is.

I think 4s who do this are displaying the typical compensatory elitism that stems from their desire to romanticize their deficiencies. Translation: They twist their sense of being different inside out and use it as part of the image they construct, one which doesn't participate in the "basic and simple and shallow practice of normal socialization" because they are "above that" and "can't be understood" anyway.

The elitism in 4s is compensatory and the image they craft is as phony as that which they criticize, especially with 4w3s.

All personas are crafted, 4s just see this more and use it as an opportunity to be different and "special".

First, obviously, the differences in how these terms are defined and described is creating a lot of confusion, and accidental mistypings. I think purposeful mistypings are rare. (To be clear, I don't think anyone I quoted said anything regarding this, I just felt the need to point it out.)

Second, regarding 4s (or let's say, those who relate to 4s) and this sx instinct: 4s can have a tendency to be in love with their pain, partly an appreciation of deep emotion of whatever kind, partly a coping mechanism - if there's some beauty there in the pain, if there's some pleasure, it's easier to take. It's less tortuous, it adds some kind of meaning to something that might crush you otherwise. When the sx instinct is described as intensity, connection, deep meaning to be found in the constant hunger, deep emotion in yearning, and the so instinct is described like cascadeco said above, as mainly being concerned with social hierarchy, more connections with less depth, more with the group than an intimacy based on vulnerable individuality, those who consider authenticity and depth of connection to be of utmost importance, like 4s or those high in Fi, are going to bristle at the idea they are so doms. I think we don't have to be ungenerous and imply it's all a crafted persona to be seen as special, at least not most of the time.

 

[1487610420]

First, obviously, the differences in how these terms are defined and described is creating a lot of confusion, and accidental mistypings. I think purposeful mistypings are rare. (To be clear, I don't think anyone I quoted said anything regarding this, I just felt the need to point it out.)

Second, regarding 4s (or let's say, those who relate to 4s) and this sx instinct: 4s can have a tendency to be in love with their pain, partly an appreciation of deep emotion of whatever kind, partly a coping mechanism - if there's some beauty there in the pain, if there's some pleasure, it's easier to take. It's less tortuous, it adds some kind of meaning to something that might crush you otherwise. When the sx instinct is described as intensity, connection, deep meaning to be found in the constant hunger, deep emotion in yearning, and the so instinct is described like cascadeco said above, as mainly being concerned with social hierarchy, more connections with less depth, more with the group than an intimacy based on vulnerable individuality, those who consider authenticity and depth of connection to be of utmost importance, like 4s or those high in Fi, are going to bristle at the idea they are so doms. I think we don't have to be ungenerous and imply it's all a crafted persona to be seen as special, at least not most of the time.

That pattern is the bane of self typing, and typology in general.

 

[Peter Deadpan]

I think we don't have to be ungenerous and imply it's all a crafted persona to be seen as special, at least not most of the time.

I just don't even know what to say anymore. What I said isn't "ungenerous". I just don't get how you're interpreting that as selfish.

Personas ARE crafted. EVERY person has a persona. It's just that 4s view this craft as an art form, an opportunity to make themselves unique. At the core of that beneath their consciousness is the driving force behind their personality, and that is compensation for their feelings of deficiency.

I'm a 4. With Sx might I add. I just don't get how what I'm saying is still being viewed as harsh or selfish or any other negative descriptor.

I'm just gonna go. This is no longer enjoyable for me and frankly maybe it never was because of the way this all unfolded against my favor for whatever collection of reasons. I'm not even trying to make a big deal out of it, I just feel perpetually misunderstood and like people frequently project onto me thoughts/feelings/perspectives I don't have, or just inadvertently twist what I'm saying in a manner which invites me to rephrase or correct my previous statements, but by that time few people are even trying to backtrack and allow me space to get my points across.

It's just frustrating, and then people paint me out to be some sort of misguided overactive shit-stirrer who doesn't know what they are talking about, and yes... I'm a little oversensitive to that sort of thing.

Normally I don't blatantly whine about this shit, I just get frustrated and walk away, but in an effort to be less of a dick overall and more transparent, I decided to barf my thoughts and feelings about all this.

Also, so there are NO misunderstandings, I'm not mad. I'm just going because this is exhausting.

 

[Earl Grey]

I think we don't have to be ungenerous and imply it's all a crafted persona to be seen as special, at least not most of the time.

As in the posts you quoted, we were addressing very specific behaviour (the behaviour itself, not a type as a whole), a part whose tendencies are present within the spectrum of 4 sx individuals and align with the theory of sx 4s, in ways that @Peter Deadpan has described (correct me if I am wrong).

By Peter Deadpan: "I think 4s who do this [...]"
From myself: "[...] and those who perpetuate are really giving their own type a bad rep."

It indeed would be ungenerous to explain it very narrowly, what you say is not wrong- but I fail to see what you are addressing because we were talking about specifics here. Either I missed it, or none of us made descriptions that entirely encompasses either sx or 4 as a whole.
That was not what was being discussed to begin with.

 

[Lady Lazarus]

I just don't even know what to say anymore. What I said isn't "ungenerous". I just don't get how you're interpreting that as selfish.

Personas ARE crafted. EVERY person has a persona. It's just that 4s view this craft as an art form, an opportunity to make themselves unique. At the core of that beneath their consciousness is the driving force behind their personality, and that is compensation for their feelings of deficiency.

I'm a 4. With Sx might I add. I just don't get how what I'm saying is still being viewed as harsh or selfish or any other negative descriptor.

I'm just gonna go. This is no longer enjoyable for me and frankly maybe it never was because of the way this all unfolded against my favor for whatever collection of reasons. I'm not even trying to make a big deal out of it, I just feel perpetually misunderstood and like people frequently project onto me thoughts/feelings/perspectives I don't have, or just inadvertently twist what I'm saying in a manner which invites me to rephrase or correct my previous statements, but by that time few people are even trying to backtrack and allow me space to get my points across.

It's just frustrating, and then people paint me out to be some sort of misguided overactive shit-stirrer who doesn't know what they are talking about, and yes... I'm a little oversensitive to that sort of thing.

Normally I don't blatantly whine about this shit, I just get frustrated and walk away, but in an effort to be less of a dick overall and more transparent, I decided to barf my thoughts and feelings about all this.

Also, so there are NO misunderstandings, I'm not mad. I'm just going because this is exhausting.

I think a lot of people got immediately put off by the commonplace connotation of the word objectification. I was among them. Apologies about my drama queen comment about killing myself. I just imagined what it would be like to be with others on the basis of objectification and lack of reciprocation and I felt...frightened? That word isn't quite it but it's the closest thing I could think of. Intermingled with repulsed. Or like it wasn't something I could stand to live. Then again I completely lack detachment.

Now that I have seen you explain more I think I get the gist of the distinction you were trying to make. Which to your credit is very hard to put into words.

Though I think some people probably just don't want to be social doms or whatever(I can't judge on that one of course, I used to not want to be a 9), I think most of the people in this thread were just genuinely confused and in disagreement with this definition independent of themselves. (Granted some of them possess that one irritating debate style that seems to be going around and clustering.) Primarily because it doesn't align with the more prevalent "very human" take on sx.

Regardless, I'm glad you tried to knock these things off the weird pedestal they are on and tried to neutralize them. That is to say, I don't think you were being negative.

Yes, your word choice could have been better and I agree that some of your explanations have a lot of 4 in them (by the way, I relate to almost none of that). But intellectually, while I dont relate or agree, I can appreciate what I percieve you were getting at overall and the idea that it would be extremely difficult for you to remove any slant when explaining this sort of thing.

 

[Peter Deadpan]

I think a lot of people got immediately put off by the commonplace connotation of the word objectification. I was among them. Apologies about my drama queen comment about killing myself. I just imagined what it would be like to be with others on the basis of objectification and lack of reciprocation and I felt...frightened? That word isn't quite it but it's the closest thing I could think of. Intermingled with repulsed. Or like it wasn't something I could stand to live. Then again I completely lack detachment.

Now that I have seen you explain more I think I get the gist of the distinction you were trying to make. Which to your credit is very hard to put into words.

Though I think some people probably just don't want to be social doms or whatever(I can't judge on that one of course, I used to not want to be a 9), I think most of the people in this thread were just genuinely confused and in disagreement with this definition independent of themselves. (Granted some of them possess that one irritating debate style that seems to be going around and clustering.) Primarily because it doesn't align with the more prevalent "very human" take on sx.

Regardless, I'm glad you tried to knock these things off the weird pedestal they are on and tried to neutralize them. That is to say, I don't think you were being negative.

Yes, your word choice could have been better and I agree that some of your explanations have a lot of 4 in them (by the way, I relate to almost none of that). But intellectually, while I dont relate or agree, I can appreciate what I percieve you were getting at overall and the idea that it would be extremely difficult for you to remove any slant when explaining this sort of thing.

Thank you, I appreciate this.

 

[Starry]

I wonder which is worse...a small handful of 2s that don’t know they’re 2s in disagreement with you...or a bunch of sx doms in disagreement with you...? (I think we all know the answer here)

Peter’s awesome and super insightful. And honestly there is a rather large *self* component here that we sx doms forget to acknowledge as we feel so focused on other. But many of us won’t *invoke all the magic* until we know the whole of us either is or will be accepted. And so I can see if there is an especially unhealthy sx dom how that could lead down the objectification path. We’re also prone to fantasy. And we’re sx/sp heavy here...do we have any sx/sos that could comment? Perhaps it could be said that objectification applies more readily to them idk but I have seen what looks a bit like “what can the intimate do for me?” whether that’s accurate or not

 

[Luminous]

I just don't even know what to say anymore. What I said isn't "ungenerous". I just don't get how you're interpreting that as selfish.

Personas ARE crafted. EVERY person has a persona. It's just that 4s view this craft as an art form, an opportunity to make themselves unique. At the core of that beneath their consciousness is the driving force behind their personality, and that is compensation for their feelings of deficiency.

By ungenerous, I didn't mean at all that you were being selfish. I meant that some people (like me) care very much about authenticity and try to make that persona match the internal as best as possible. (This is in no way a commentary on you, because I see you as someone who is very honest and authentic.) I was trying to explain why someone like that might see typing as sx dom as being better. (Also this has just made me realize why I can be so private - I want as little mask as possible, but do not feel comfortable standing naked before everyone much of the time.)

It indeed would be ungenerous to explain it very narrowly, what you say is not wrong- but I fail to see what you are addressing because we were talking about specifics here. Either I missed it, or none of us made descriptions that entirely encompasses either sx or 4 as a whole.

I was specifically addressing your difficulty with understanding why some people would consider sx better than so, since you said those who do this are less than pathetic and that it needs to die.

 

[Luminous]

I wonder which is worse...a small handful of 2s that don’t know they’re 2s in disagreement with you...or a bunch of sx doms in disagreement with you...? (I think we all know the answer here)

I don't.

 

[Earl Grey]

I was specifically addressing your difficulty with understanding why some people would consider sx better than so, since you said those who do this are less than pathetic and that it needs to die.

Correction,

you'll see comments referring to sp/so and so/sp being 'boring' and any number of bland superficial adjectives pretty commonly on here. Sx is like the N of enneagram,

1) This behaviour is pathetic (do I really have to explain why?)
2) The misconceptions surrounding sx (and IV in general, really) & sx being considered 'better' needs to die.

Simply preferring a function/etc over another is not pathetic in on itself, that is just preference.
Taking it further and glorifying a function over another by overly generalizing it (eg sx = intimacy, so = boring, shallow), is another story.
It perpetuates misconceptions and promotes further mistyping by others.

 

[Peter Deadpan]

By ungenerous, I didn't mean at all that you were being selfish. I meant that some people (like me) care very much about authenticity and try to make that persona match the internal as best as possible. (This is in no way a commentary on you, because I see you as someone who is very honest and authentic.) I was trying to explain why someone like that might see typing as sx dom as being better. (Also this has just made me realize why I can be so private - I want as little mask as possible, but do not feel comfortable standing naked before everyone much of the time.)

Thanks for clarifying.

 

[Luminous]

Correction,



1) This behaviour is pathetic (do I really have to explain why?)
2) The misconceptions surrounding sx (and IV in general, really) & sx being considered 'better' needs to die.

Simply preferring a function/etc over another is not pathetic in on itself, that is just preference.
Taking it further and glorifying a function over another by overly generalizing it (eg sx = intimacy, so = boring, shallow), is another story.
It perpetuates misconceptions and promotes further mistyping by others.

Okay, yes.

I was still just trying to explain further, since you had said you didn't understand.

 

[Starry]

Anyone glorifying being an sx dom... this will immediately call into question for me whether they truly are one sorry folks but I’m not going to pretend that what I just said ain’t true.

 

[cascadeco]

Anyone glorifying being an sx dom... this will immediately call into question for me whether they truly are one sorry folks but I’m not going to pretend that what I just said ain’t true.

I don't know that I've actually seen sx dom being glorified; I've just seen enough hints of so/sp and sp/so being the dull lifeless leave it to beaver folks that sx becomes more 'desirable'. Maybe it's just me getting this impression though. (descriptive words are mine...just trying to convey a vibe)

 

[Starry]

I don't know that I've actually seen sx dom being glorified; I've just seen enough hints of so/sp and sp/so being the dull lifeless leave it to beaver folks that sx becomes more 'desirable'. Maybe it's just me getting this impression though. (descriptive words are mine...just trying to convey a vibe)

I’ve seen it. What I think is a larger challenge though is that sx reads a bit like what weve been taught to value in this nation... sorta like this brave, uncompromising, undoubtedly attractive person that goes wherever his/her heart leads them... and you know maybe that’s us at our best idfk. But the truth of it is a lot more turmoilish than the descriptions allow