[Type 2] What are good pairings for 2's?

[Giggly]

I don't know much about the enneagram and I am curious about this.

 

[Magic Poriferan]

Good is very subjective and matchmaking with type is questionable. You probably are familiar with that spiel.

To my recollection, some figures on the frequency of different pairings (which may be questionable) indicated that female 2s most frequently go with male 8s. Not sure about male 2s. Anyhow, frequency doesn't necessarily mean success. However, 2 and 8 does intuitively make sense.

I imagine 2s work best with types that naturally and/or willing take on strong, leading roles. Assertive, aggressive types. The dynamic can be a little bit more complicated than that, however, since 2s usually want to be needed and want someone that will be open to care and support.

Off the top of my head, 8, 3, 1, and 7 strike me as the better half. 8 is the most straightforward, because they are very strong types but have a sort of recklessness that could use a 2s support. 3s are take charge, success driven sort of people, though I suspect they would disregard 2s a little more than 8s do because they have considerably more polish than 8s. 1s seem appropriate if they are the sort of 1 that has externalized their reformism because they fighting, championing types that I think a 2 can really dig., 1s who are stuck on the internal level of reform are much more hesitant, anxious, insecure, etc and I think 2s wouldn't find them as appealing. 7s I'd say are the wildest card of the bunch. They can lead the way, but they are nothing if not unpredictable. They can form the pattern of 7 doing crazy fun stuff, and 2 taking care of them when it's time to wind down. I think they are the least likely of the four to impress a 2, however.

The worst type for a 2? Another 2. It's probably the most ill-conceived of the same type couplings. 9s also probably have very little to peak a 2s fancy, being highly passive peace makers, after all.

But remember, this was all immensely unscientific. It's just my wild guesses based on a lot of generalizations. I think any relationship can work, and furthermore my guess about the averages could even be totally off. Not only can people work something out with any other type, I specifically think any type can provide the sort of things another type is interest in, in their own way.

On a somewhat less related note, I personally fancy 2s the most.

 

[Giggly]

Good is very subjective and matchmaking with type is questionable. You probably are familiar with that spiel.

Yes but it is interesting to hear what others think of this. If no one answers (except you ofc) that might also be telling about 2's.

To my recollection, some figures on the frequency of different pairings (which may be questionable) indicated that female 2s most frequently go with male 8s. Not sure about male 2s. Anyhow, frequency doesn't necessarily mean success. However, 2 and 8 does intuitively make sense.

Wow, I didn't realize it was that common. I do find myself very attracted to 8's, and my past attractions have proven this, but I would hope it's not the only type I'm attracted to.

I imagine 2s work best with types that naturally and/or willing take on strong, leading roles. Assertive, aggressive types. The dynamic can be a little bit more complicated than that, however, since 2s usually want to be needed and want someone that will be open to care and support.

Hmm. Yes I do want someone who needs me and is open to care and support, but I 'm starting to wonder if that's healthy for me to want that, and more importantly, if that even exists in other healthy people (most esp 8's?).

Off the top of my head, 8, 3, 1, and 7 strike me as the better half. 8 is the most straightforward, because they are very strong types but have a sort of recklessness that could use a 2s support. 3s are take charge, success driven sort of people, though I suspect they would disregard 2s a little more than 8s do because they have considerably more polish than 8s.

Wait, what? lol
Is this true? What do you mean by polish?

1s seem appropriate if they are the sort of 1 that has externalized their reformism because they fighting, championing types that I think a 2 can really dig.

Just a note.... believe it or not, I prefer calm, nice, mellow, mentally stable people for LTR's, not people who are always distraught or picking a fight with themselves or others. I would fear that someone who is always fighting can't relax (enough) and their moods would be contagious to me and I'd be afraid they'd turn their "fight" on me. I do like people who have a backbone and courage when it's needed though, which is something I really lack. For friendships, I probably do like the "fighters" more though.

1s who are stuck on the internal level of reform are much more hesitant, anxious, insecure, etc and I think 2s wouldn't find them as appealing.

If they don't get too depressed with life, I'd probably enjoy this sort of passion. The biggest problem I can see is that I have enough insecurity and hesitation for 2 people already. It would be like hanging around a clone of myself.

7s I'd say are the wildest card of the bunch. They can lead the way, but they are nothing if not unpredictable. They can form the pattern of 7 doing crazy fun stuff, and 2 taking care of them when it's time to wind down. I think they are the least likely of the four to impress a 2, however.

I'm not one of those 2's who enjoys being motherly with able adults. I dunno, maybe I'm a bad 2. With children or physically handicapped people I enjoy that but not with adults for more than a brief moment. This is because I like to have fun too and the person in the "caretaker" role (me) always has to be the responsible one, which is not fun, I see it more as just a necessary role that someone has to take. If I am forced to take on this role with an adult I will probably see as unfair if I'm always the one mostly doing it, and eventually back out of it.

The worst type for a 2? Another 2. It's probably the most ill-conceived of the same type couplings. 9s also probably have very little to peak a 2s fancy, being highly passive peace makers, after all.

I think I'd have to try these to know for sure.

But remember, this was all immensely unscientific. It's just my wild guesses based on a lot of generalizations. I think any relationship can work, and furthermore my guess about the averages could even be totally off. Not only can people work something out with any other type, I specifically think any type can provide the sort of things another type is interest in, in their own way.

Yes, I agree, I'm sure any type pairing can work. It was very interesting to get your perceptive though, even if it is unscientific.

On a somewhat less related note, I personally fancy 2s the most.

Really? Is that something you've always felt or grew into?

 

[FDG]

Usually enneagram suggest types that share the harmonic triad, so 2-7-9, 1-3-5, 4-6-8, since those types share a similar attitude towards solving life problems. Besides, Giggly struck me more as a 9w1(primarly) or 6w7(secondarily) rather than a 2? In many ways your character reminds me of my girlfriends' which is a 9w1 (I think), that's why I'm saying.

 

[Speed Gavroche]

I'd say every but 5.

 

[Elfboy]

let's see. just my opinion but
1: could work
another 2: definitely
3: probably. there needs are similar, but they're different enough to foster attraction.
4: no, self absorbed individualist + manipulative altruist = FAIL
5: no they're almost complete opposites and would not meet each others needs
6: yes, the 6 is vulnerable while the 2 is supportive and encouraging
7: probably, the seem like they would compliment each other
8: fuck no. I don't know why a lot of sites say this is a good pairing, it absolutely is not in most circumstances. 8s do not stand for manipulation and will get very aggressive if they are manipulated. this will only cause the 2 to become 1) an abuse victim and 2) more manipulative, insistent, delusional and passive aggressive. this is one of the worst possible enneagram pairings I can think of (if I ended up with a 2 I'd probably go Darth Vader on his ass)
9: definitely, this is actually the best pairing in my opinion

 

[Udog]

Enneagram institute has an interesting relationship analysis:

http://www.enneagraminstitute.com/matrix.asp

I have had good experience with the 2 and 9 pairing (me as the 9), although both of us were too young to express our needs properly, which led to the slow destruction of the relationship.

 

[Elfboy]

Enneagram institute has an interesting relationship analysis:

http://www.enneagraminstitute.com/matrix.asp

I have good experience with the 2 and 9 pairing (me as the 9), although both of us were too young to express our needs properly, which led to the slow destruction of the relationship.

in a lot of ways, 9s are like introverted 2s and vice versa. the main difference is that 2s usually like to go to others, 9s usually like people to come to them. 2s want to hug someone, 9s want to be hugged.

 

[Udog]

in a lot of ways, 9s are like introverted 2s and vice versa. the main difference is that 2s usually like to go to others, 9s usually like people to come to them. 2s want to hug someone, 9s want to be hugged.

Yeah, that seems mostly right. Although when it was just the two of us, I had no problem initiating the hugs.

 

[Santosha]

Honestly.. I think that the instinctual variant might be more important in a relationship pairing than the actual enneagram. Ofcourse it's just theory, but romantically I'v notced more problems (being an sx) with so and sp INTJ & INFJ, than I have with say.. an ESTJ Sx.

And I tend to think that what it really comes down to.. is that you can learn to accept and love different processing (even if you don't fully understand it) as long as the ultimate goals, passions, etc. are in-tune.

Like, I might understand INFJ's VERY WELL.. but if that INFJ has a strong SP variant, I almost always find myself seeking a deeper, more intense connection than they can comfortably give or maintain. I really do believe that that similar life goals and needs outweigh processing.

 

[Elfboy]

Honestly.. I think that the instinctual variant might be more important in a relationship pairing than the actual enneagram. Ofcourse it's just theory, but romantically I'v notced more problems (being an sx) with so and sp INTJ & INFJ, than I have with say.. an ESTJ Sx.

And I tend to think that what it really comes down to.. is that you can learn to accept and love different processing (even if you don't fully understand it) as long as the ultimate goals, passions, etc. are in-tune.

Like, I might understand INFJ's VERY WELL.. but if that INFJ has a strong SP variant, I almost always find myself seeking a deeper, more intense connection than they can comfortably give or maintain. I really do believe that that similar life goals and needs outweigh processing.

I agree with this post
except for the Sp dom part.
Sp/So maybe, but Sp/Sx types can be very sensual once they get to know you. when an Sp/Sx locks on to you, they we take you into our world. we will make sure all of your needs are met and give you all the affection you need. perhaps you would prefer the more engaging, forward sexual energy of the Sx/So

from enneagramunderground
[QUOTE}sp/sx
These people often have an earthy, mysterious quality to them. They are quietly intense, but to others may seem oblivious to the greater social world around them, instead favoring personal interests. They are slow to commit, but once they do it is with an attitude of life commitment, to the establishment of an impermeable bond. Others can be taken aback by how suddenly and completely this type can lock into them, and by the depth of understanding of the other's condition. They attach to others at an organic, root level, in contrast to the other subvariant's surface formality. Somewhat hesitant to enter new relationships, they instead preserve the select few enduring bonds they carefully form along the way. The sanctuary of home is of paramount concern, and this type takes particular delight in decorating their spaces to reflect their cherished sense of taste and depth. Depth and discrimination characterize this stacking.[/QUOTE]

 

[Magic Poriferan]

Wow, I didn't realize it was that common. I do find myself very attracted to 8's, and my past attractions have proven this, but I would hope it's not the only type I'm attracted to.

I think 2 and 8 is a very typical, traditional relationship.

Hmm. Yes I do want someone who needs me and is open to care and support, but I 'm starting to wonder if that's healthy for me to want that, and more importantly, if that even exists in other healthy people (most esp 8's?).

I think wanting an SO to need you would only be unhealthy if you come to the point that you hold them back in order to facilitate need. Being open to care and support sounds inherently healthy. And like-wise, I think it's healthy for someone to need you, in a sense. Maybe not really need like one needs air or food, but at least desires you at a priority higher than other desires. I think that's pretty normal for a romantic relationship.

Wait, what? lol
Is this true? What do you mean by polish?

What I mean is that 8s let their hair down. They allow themselves to get openly angry and get down and dirty. 3s are much more guarded about the appearance of flaws, and as such I think that might create a greater resistant to support from a 2 that would imply there are flaws.

Just a note.... believe it or not, I prefer calm, nice, mellow, mentally stable people for LTR's, not people who are always distraught or picking a fight with themselves or others. I would fear that someone who is always fighting can't relax (enough) and their moods would be contagious to me and I'd be afraid they'd turn their "fight" on me. I do like people who have a backbone and courage when it's needed though, which is something I really lack. For friendships, I probably do like the "fighters" more though.

Fair enough. To get more specific about 1s, they are often considered perfectionists. If they focus their scrutiny outward they see all kinds of errors that need to be fixed, so they become pro-active reformers. They don't tend to be nearly as conflict oriented or rough around the edges as an 8, though.

If they don't get too depressed with life, I'd probably enjoy this sort of passion. The biggest problem I can see is that I have enough insecurity and hesitation for 2 people already. It would be like hanging around a clone of myself.

Hah. You might have to hope that the person will become less depressed after they start a relationship with you. Me personal experience is that they are going to be pretty depressed when you meet them...
Not necessarily a clone, though. There are many different ways to be insecure.

I'm not one of those 2's who enjoys being motherly with able adults. I dunno, maybe I'm a bad 2. With children or physically handicapped people I enjoy that but not with adults for more than a brief moment. This is because I like to have fun too and the person in the "caretaker" role (me) always has to be the responsible one, which is not fun, I see it more as just a necessary role that someone has to take. If I am forced to take on this role with an adult I will probably see as unfair if I'm always the one mostly doing it, and eventually back out of it.

It can happen that way. I think the bargain a lot of people make in this situation is that they try to ride along for a lot of the fun at the price of knowing they'll be the ones cleaning it up later. In your case, personally, I think the bigger concern with a 7 is commitment issues.

I think I'd have to try these to know for sure.

You want to try having 9 different relationships in sequence?

Yes, I agree, I'm sure any type pairing can work. It was very interesting to get your perceptive though, even if it is unscientific.

Really? Is that something you've always felt or grew into?

That's been my impression for as long as I've know about the enneagram. The profiles of the type 2 always appealed to me the most.

 

[Elfboy]

Wow, I didn't realize it was that common. I do find myself very attracted to 8's, and my past attractions have proven this, but I would hope it's not the only type I'm attracted to.

8/2 relationships can work if you're both healthy, but they will be a disaster if one of you is unhealthy

Hmm. Yes I do want someone who needs me and is open to care and support, but I 'm starting to wonder if that's healthy for me to want that, and more importantly, if that even exists in other healthy people (most esp 8's?).

a relationship cannot work with an 8 unless it is interdependent. if they need you, they will feel threatened, if they aren't connected with you, they won't desire you intimately.

Just a note.... believe it or not, I prefer calm, nice, mellow, mentally stable people for LTR's, not people who are always distraught or picking a fight with themselves or others. I would fear that someone who is always fighting can't relax (enough) and their moods would be contagious to me and I'd be afraid they'd turn their "fight" on me. I do like people who have a backbone and courage when it's needed though, which is something I really lack. For friendships, I probably do like the "fighters" more though.

in that case, it sounds like an 8w9 would be better for you than an 8w7. 8w7s are fighters even when they're healthy. they just become protectors and peace makers instead of peace breakers.

If they don't get too depressed with life, I'd probably enjoy this sort of passion. The biggest problem I can see is that I have enough insecurity and hesitation for 2 people already. It would be like hanging around a clone of myself.

makes sense

I'm not one of those 2's who enjoys being motherly with able adults. I dunno, maybe I'm a bad 2. With children or physically handicapped people I enjoy that but not with adults for more than a brief moment. This is because I like to have fun too and the person in the "caretaker" role (me) always has to be the responsible one, which is not fun, I see it more as just a necessary role that someone has to take. If I am forced to take on this role with an adult I will probably see as unfair if I'm always the one mostly doing it, and eventually back out of it.

no, that makes you a good 2. most assertive men would be greatly annoyed by a sexual partner who tried to be their mother. equality is the way to go
there are certain types of men who would enjoy a motherly wife, but it sounds like those are not the types of guys you would be attracted to.

 

[Such Irony]

I'd say every but 5.

I think 5 is one of the worst matches for a type 2. The two's natural inclination is to try to get closer to you and fives tend to seek more distance.

 

[Giggly]

Okay I'm back to this. Thank you everyone for your thoughts. I'll probably come back asking more questions as they come up.

Usually enneagram suggest types that share the harmonic triad, so 2-7-9, 1-3-5, 4-6-8, since those types share a similar attitude towards solving life problems.

I'm unfamiliar with the triad concept. Assuming I'm a 2, I'm guessing the 2-7-9 applies to me but I'm not sure how.

Besides, Giggly struck me more as a 9w1(primarly) or 6w7(secondarily) rather than a 2? In many ways your character reminds me of my girlfriends' which is a 9w1 (I think), that's why I'm saying.

Really? I think I remember someone who knows me fairly well also suggesting I was 9w1 a long time ago. I probably need to figure out what my enneagram and instinctual stacking is for sure before even wondering about good pairings.

 

[knight]

9 goes well with 9

 

[Elfboy]

9 goes well with 9

9 + 9 is actually the only type pairing I don't see for a 9

 

[sleuthiness]

Think my sp/so e23 enfj aunt thinks I'm stingy, possibly selfish. A project? Someone collapses: she'll be first on the ground; I'll leave a handwritten note with the wind before strolling away. Metaphoric effect.

I like em despite their detractors.