User Tag List

First 26343536

Results 351 to 356 of 356

  1. #351
    Senior Member Venus Rose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sx/so
    Socionics
    EII None
    Posts
    151

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OrangeAppled View Post
    I just wonder if I am the one getting it wrong... Because if I went by this common understanding, then I'd type as sx-dom. So I start to think maybe I am creating a "spin" to type a certain way. I admit, I have a knee-jerk against being sx-dom precisely because of its "popularity". But the sx 4 is also very extreme, like a hotel room trashing rock star type, and I feel too withdrawn to be that "out there". Plus, I find a certain vulgarity in being a rebellious cliche or competitive in romance; it's "beneath me" (but I'd associate that with so 4...?).
    I know this is an old post and maybe your views might have changed, but I just wanted to comment anyway. I am actually very withdrawn myself and nowhere close to "hotel room trashing rock star type," in fact, that image seems to resonate most with maybe 7 and/or 8 sx/so.
    There is not really anything in the sxso descriptions that necessitates this either. For instance, their energy is described thus:
    Expression: intense, outer-focused
    Energy: intense energy expressed outwards, assertively
    Behavior: intense, assertive, sultry and aggressive
    Mindset: "If I can maintain position and inclusion in the group/world, I can keep up and escalate all this merging/intensity."
    But you can be those things without being a "hotel room trashing rockstar." Here's an example of a 5w4 sx/so, and he comes across somewhat awkward, actually, and I can connect with that. It's not all "smooth and sparkling and charming energy," basically. With a withdrawn type like 4 and 5, when that combines with sx/so that need not mean they are very extroverted, or even resemble the "rockstar" archetype by any means. I at least, don't.

    I am aware more of enviousness in myself, but when I was less aware, I feel like the resentment came through less (but then there's the conundrum of me having been less aware). It took me some time to accept the "vices" as a legit part of enneagram, which now I see as essential to its foundation & understanding types; but I balked at the idea of being "envious". In allowing it to surface, it's being expressed more by me, but I think this is important to moving past it. The sx 4 is the most openly envious, apparently to the point of being competitive, which I am not. But angry & resentful, yes. The hostility the sx 4 can have is what I can relate to.
    I am not openly envious either, nor do I try to harm someone out of malice/vengeance, or on purpose at all. I don't think that description applies to everyone.

    I guess I'd ask sx 4s how they'd describe their envy being open & even shameless, their competitiveness, & their making others "suffer", etc. I still fancy myself as more contained, although I "endure silently" far less.
    I am actually full of shame, quite shy, can be withdrawn, and am not competitive. I can become jealous, yes, and that jealousy can consume me so much it's hard for me to literally see anything else. I panic. It becomes the full focus of my attention. But I withdraw, feeling like I must be not good enough anyway...but I don't try to upstage or "become the best" and I actually think this kind of thing is more in line with 3 influence. I barely have any 3 influence. I only feel angry when rejected (romantically) because the pain is overwhelming, but I do not attempt to harm the other by saying vicious things or try to "denigrate" them or anything like that. I just don't do those things. And I am not even an angry person otherwise, so...yeah. I most definitely do not resemble type 8.

    Though I must say I do not "endure silently" nor "contain it" either. Basically I do not attempt to seriously harm someone, or be cruel on purpose, but the other person is likely going to know I am hurt because of how strongly I react.

  2. #352
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    497

    Default

    They aren't more popular in typology communities...they are more popularly mistyped as in typology communities.
    Click here for my 2500+ Enneagram Type List to type yourself and others with. It's the only valid breakdown for every enneagram type, wing and stack.

    Click here for the only valid visual typing model of stackings on earth and socionics.
    Click here for enneagram type descriptions as a supplement to the only valid breakdown for every type, wing and stack.
    Click here for my typings of 100+ fictional exemplars and here for my typings of 90+ typology central members.

  3. #353
    Senior Member Venus Rose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sx/so
    Socionics
    EII None
    Posts
    151

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Forelsket View Post
    Sx doms as social justice warriors.. that kind of makes sense. We care deeply about things and we don't hold back.
    I don't agree or disagree with you but I would just like to offer a counter-point. I see "social justice warriors" as caring deeply, and engaging on a consistent basis, with the social issues they are involved with. SX has this thing about wanting "charge," and so I actually think that they might attempt to cause change (with sxso anyway), but they likely not going to stick or be committed to being consistently involved. It's an energy thing, it builds up and "explodes/discharges" and social change seems kind of hard to come by and the whole process probably gets stagnant and boring and repetitive at times. At which point, the sx dom might lose interest. Maybe they will come back to it...but yeah, I hope you get what I am saying.

  4. #354
    ∂ιѕﻭяα¢є∂ ¢σѕмσηαυт Luminous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    952 sx/sp
    Posts
    5,009

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Venus Rose View Post
    I am actually quite sick of the glamorization of sx. I lived almost the entire last decade believing I was inherently undesirable and there is no way in hell anyone could even be superficially attracted to me, let alone on a deeper level.

    I don't believe that anymore, but your primary instinct is your area of vulnerability. Not all of it is pretty and glamorous.
    Yes, a thousand times yes.
    ƒ O ᖇ G E ᗪ I ᑎ ƒ I ᖇ E ★
    -: ✦ :-

    h n g ⊱9w1✶S✶5w4✶X✶2w1⊰ g h t
    -: ✦ :-
    ★ᴅᴏɴ'ᴛ ꜰᴇᴇᴅ ᴛʜᴇ ᴇᴇʟꜱ★

  5. #355
    Senior Member Venus Rose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sx/so
    Socionics
    EII None
    Posts
    151

    Default

    I am usually not super-skeptical of people's self-typings and such. I might suggest a different type should I see a reason for it, but I am not particularly interested in..."calling out bullshit" so to speak, since I tend to trust what people usually say anyways. Besides, if someone types a certain way because they want to look like that, then I guess that's on them. You cannot really achieve anything productive out of such typings; and that's their decision. I am more drawn to people who want to open up and be honest.

    I am also skeptical of "stats" because they are never backed up, just said with an air of authority. For example, the idea that "sx lasts are the most common"; they may or may not be, I don't know. But I do tend to get a little baffled when such things are seemingly pulled out of thin air, or perhaps based on "personal experience," but that kind of 'stats' can't be backed up.

    Anyways, I was mostly thinking that people constantly referring to their issues around romance and rejection does not necessarily mean they aren't sx dominant. Sx is tied to being attuned to chemistry, wanting charge etc. but one of the most salient ways this manifests in reality is in the realm of romance. I have actually never met another sx dom who wasn't as triggered and upset by rejection as I can be. Others can be as well, I don't mean to undermine that. But with your dominant instinct, the damage can be really serious, and hard to deal with or get over. Even the smallest of things can cause you to be become scared/upset when it comes to this. You often overreact.

    And it's pretty easy to differentiate between heart types who might relate to sx for heart type reasons, and sx dominants. In person, at least. Instincts are specially apparent in person. I can't describe the "reason" behind it, just that I get a strong intuition or vibe wrt whether or not they might be sx doms.

    Edit: oh and, with regards to the title question, I do notice a lot of people type as sx/sp, even surpassing other stackings, at times. I don't know if that is due to mistyping or not, but I am a little skeptical there. I have seen this on a few polls on this forum for instance, and also a short survey I did (sample was any and everyone on typology forums but I cut it short at 45 people; at the moment I was feeling a little impatient lol), in which the majority were sx/sp. This does have me a little confused.


    Quote Originally Posted by Klaus V. View Post
    Some of the descriptions you provided are a bit imbalanced and biased (Soc descriptions are broad and describe highly specific things, Sx descriptions are short and vague).
    To begin with, I disagree with the way the author interpreted "connections" as being almost strictly Soc, it's a very limited view.
    I completely agree. The context is very important and the person's body language, focus of attention, "vibe" etc. even though vague, can potentially point to instincts. Sx can also care about connections and I don't understand the black and white "connection is social and if you describe sx using that word you are describing social"...

    Edit: For example, I personally don't use "connection" to describe sx (I don't have a word for that specific thing I seek, yet), but I had an IEI sx/sp friend for whom that was her go-to word when she was referring to this sx specific bond or relationship that she seeks. I agree with her self-typing as sx/sp.

    My main issue with it is that most of those are very common and trivial concerns ("Who are we?", "How close are we?", "Why isn't she responding to my text?"). And some are just weird ("Does that person have germs?" Seriously...?). I can see how some of those can be chalked up to the Social instinct, but the issue is those are such common human experiences that they can be interpreted however you want. Feeling lonely ("Why can’t I find anyone to hang out with?") is not a Soc thing, worrying how those who are close to you perceive you or feel about you ("Why isn't she responding to my text?") is not a Soc thing -- those are common human experiences. In my view, instincts should describe common, basic drives and focuses, but never highly specific behaviours; the drive behind those behaviours are the most important (this should be applied to all of Enneagram literature, imo).
    Hmm, I see what you are saying. My guess would be that they are tapping into Social's need to be seen and recognized and being part of a group that appreciates them, when they refer to those behaviors. For instance, a social dominant may become anxious if 'lack of text response' to them indicated that they were somehow not part of the social circle, that they were seen in a negative light, or that 'people were thinking negative thoughts about them.' Based on my interactions with SO doms...

    I'm okay with most of those, although friendships and close bonds are definitely not exclusive to Soc and I'm unsure whether those should even be related to instinctual variants in any way (just like the source claimed that love and intimacy are not instincts).
    Yup, yet again, just because someone is talking about friends and sx and doesn't mean they are automatically talking about the social instinct.

    Your source contradicts your claims:
    Yes, absolutely. Lack of reciprocation can indicate to the sx dom that they might not be desirable enough and that can be extremely upsetting/triggering.

    Sx's need for chemistry can be one-sided, but it doesn't have to be, there's no logic behind that. "Chemistry" rarely happens without some sort of connection, you could say chemistry is an impression or reaction towards someone else, while connection is something that can be build on top of it and used to reinforce it. Yes, chemistry and connection are not the same, but those two can definitely coexist and often do.
    Yeah, one of the most obvious ways the sexual instinct can manifest is in the realm of romance/relationships.

    I've seen the words emotional "juice" being used to describe Sx and I must say it's vague af and confuses people (chemistry or emotional intensity are better words to describe it). What if the emotional high the Sx person gets from their relationship is related to how much they feel cared about?
    Exactly, wanting to be cared for does not equal Social; someone's "sx blueprint" may be such that care/nurture and sexuality become intertwined. It's not automatically "social."
    INFP | EII | 4w5 496 sx/so
    Answered questionnaires/typing thread
    Surveys: [
    X] [X]
    Discord


    Likes Luminous liked this post

  6. #356

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Venus Rose View Post
    I am actually quite sick of the glamorization of sx. I lived almost the entire last decade believing I was inherently undesirable and there is no way in hell anyone could even be superficially attracted to me, let alone on a deeper level.

    I don't believe that anymore, but your primary instinct is your area of vulnerability. Not all of it is pretty and glamorous.
    That's relatable. For me it served as motivation for self-improvement though, it wasn't the biggest motivator per se, but it definitely helped.
    Johari | Nohari

    Moving forward, put aside all unnecessary preconceptions, eliminate all biases, analyze all the facts without letting external influences cloud your better judgement and put together a coherent picture of the truth like a jigsaw puzzle, you have the pieces you need, the only thing left to do is to learn how to put them together properly.
    Likes Venus Rose liked this post

Similar Threads

  1. The changes in the workforce aka why are those whippersnappers so lazy?
    By Laurie in forum Politics, History, and Current Events (Temporarily Closed)
    Replies: 204
    Last Post: 11-04-2009, 10:31 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO