[sx] Sx-doms...come to me ;)

[Totenkindly]

I never really liked the 9 types of enneagram myself, finding it to feel sort of like astrology, and working by the forer effect. However, as Cascadedo pointed out, the stacking seems to really contribute something important and insightful into personality theory. Learning that I am SX/SO has been really helpful in explaining my consistent lifelong frustration with being driven to connect and interact deeply with others.

I agree with you. The nine archetypes are rather arbitrary and might not cover the full spectrum evenly of human behavior, although I think some of us do fit squarely into one of those archetypes (while others might not at all).

However, the variants seem very useful to me and don't even really have to be connected to the enneagram IMO.

 

[SilkRoad]

It does seem that way, and enneagram literature itself comments on the phenomenon; it seems "sexier" to be an sx dom, as opposed to the other two. So perhaps some of that effect is in place here, or perhaps the forum simply attracts more sx dom people.

There also seems to be a bit of a tendency to say things like "sp-doms are so selfish and conservative", and that sort of thing. Again, hmmm...

 

[JocktheMotie]

There also seems to be a bit of a tendency to say things like "sp-doms are so selfish and conservative", and that sort of thing. Again, hmmm...

This just has to do with how we interpret each other's instincts. To you, Sxs probably seem like intrusive, pushy people with no regards to personal boundaries. To Sos, we seem like people users looking to get our highs without following the proper manners to get close.

 

[Totenkindly]

There also seems to be a bit of a tendency to say things like "sp-doms are so selfish and conservative", and that sort of thing. Again, hmmm...

This just has to do with how we interpret each other's instincts. To you, Sxs probably seem like intrusive, pushy people with no regards to personal boundaries. To Sos, we seem like people users looking to get our highs without following the proper manners to get close.

Yup, good assessment Jock.

note: I read "conservative" for SPs not as political/religious style conservatism per se but more about conserving one's energy/resources and "staying inside oneself"/ avoiding risk when possible.

 

[wolfy]

Yup, good assessment Jock.

note: I read "conservative" for SPs not as political/religious style conservatism per se but more about conserving one's energy/resources and "staying inside oneself"/ avoiding risk when possible.

As an SP dom myself I'll buy that.

 

[Coriolis]

I'm an sx, but I'm hardly intense and passionate in the sense you're thinking. TBH I think my intensity and "sx-ness" is detrimental to actual relationships.

I can relate to that. I am very strong in SP, in fact, can't quite decide between SP/SX and SX/SP. What it means in practice is that my relationships tend to be all or nothing. I keep most people firmly at a distance, and it takes a great deal for me to be willing to "let someone in". On the rare occasion that I do, the person can then be overwhelmed by the intensity I bring to the relationship and in turn expect from it.

 

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

haha I just thought I'd throw that out there. It was based more on some other observations that I've made, rather than on this thread specifically.

I've also noticed that very few people seem to classify themselves as 6 - although apparently this is a very common e-type - and there seem to be tons of 4s and 5s - this also makes me suspicious but it's true that certain types are more drawn to these kinds of forums than others...

Now that the other SP and SO threads are out, I think it's lining out pretty evenly. And I think it's interesting that SX characters, for the most part, fit my perception of being SX; like there is this intensity, bordering on sexual vibe or flirtation, that exists either below the surface or is readily apparent. It bridges the gaps between MBTI type nicely.

Some of the 4 and 5 stuff is probably r/t the fact that when you wiki MBTI, it says your likely enneagram type, so I know that influenced me to think I was a 4 at first. I'm not expert on enneagram, but I suspect 4s and 5s tend to be introverts......and we know introverts love to forum and hang out online in cyberland.

I'm an sx, but I'm hardly intense and passionate in the sense you're thinking. TBH I think my intensity and "sx-ness" is detrimental to actual relationships.

I'm curious how your SXness manifests itself. I would agree that mine is detrimental to actual relationships. I scare people away, and not many can handle my intensity when I start opening up.

It does seem that way, and enneagram literature itself comments on the phenomenon; it seems "sexier" to be an sx dom, as opposed to the other two. So perhaps some of that effect is in place here, or perhaps the forum simply attracts more sx dom people.

It feels to me likely that there is a predominance of SPs on here and irl. I think it is fairly rare, but I can feel a sexual vibe from other SX doms. I've always called it a sexual 'energy.' Since tuning in to this concept of variants, I see it on here as well. It's this feeling that someone is unlikely to put up a boundary if conditions are right, and they often are right. I don't know how else to explain it. If there are no boundaries between two people, it can feel sexual or intimate or whatever term you want to use.

SPs would be less inclined to invite someone that close to their person, because they would want to make sure that everything was in order in their physical and emotional environments first, which would naturally result in more boundaries, I expect. My physical or emo state depends on others first; it's defined by my attachment to others. This sounds unhealthy, and who knows, perhaps it is in some way. But I intrinsically draw my self worth from how many deep relationships I have, and this is what makes me feel good or feel bad, depending on how it's going at a particular point in time.

What I have noticed is that SX relationships are fleeting for the most part. It's like a flame that burns hot and intense, then dissipates, or burns itself out. So you have to keep finding something new to burn with. Two SX people, or an SX dom with another SP/SX or SO/SX, can be awesome, but then the imbalance takes over and you are left with good (and bad) memories. You pay for the intensity with instability.

I perceive that this might be the way it is for SO doms, that they are always looking for the new group to create or be a part of in order to fulfill their destiny. That, when finding that great niche can feel good, it will naturally slowly start to fizzle out as the people in the group move on to something else. The SO dom will then need to branch out, and continue branching out to other venues for expression.

I think the SP dom probably appears the most stable because they consider their own well-being first. Sure, this can appear selfish if the viewer is an SX or SO dom. But SP seem the best able to balance life even if the trade off is that their life seems less exciting (at least to me).

Plus, I'm curious how many people took the test vs self-identify etc.

I paid for the test, which I am embarrassed to admit. But I HAD to know if I was SX/SO or SX/SP.

@bold: how can you find enneagram to be "sort of like astrology" but not MBTI?

The enneagram focusses on something more tangible to me - emotional coping strategies and the kinds of experiences and upbringing that contribute to them as opposed to a theoretical model that has yet to be "proven". Not that enneagram is "proven" either I don't think, but it resonates more to the kinds of behaviours I see in the world.

I guess because as I go through life, I can see that my coping strategies or ways I deal with things change. In my teen years, I think I would have definitely been e 4. At times, I lived e 8. I can be 1 or 2. But overall, yes, I think I figured out I am a 3 because I read 3's can seem to be all those at times. I just don't have that issue with typology. I have always reflected inwardly intuitively, regardless of my life situation. And I have always been Fe, even though my relational context wasn't necessarily conducive to growing my Fe. It seems more fixed on a solid foundation than enneagram. I would have to ponder more to categorize the exact differences, but, yeah, enneagram just seems more fluid and changeable to me, like reading different astrological depictions. I'm very scorpio, but I can also relate to some of the others no doubt.

But really, I like them both together - it's like nature + nurture, typology being nature, how we are born, and enneagram nurture - how our emotional experiences in childhood shape the expression of that.

I do too. And I think you hit the nail on the head with the nature/nurture analogy. In fact, I don't think the abandonment and rejection issues in childhood made me INFJ (i think that's biology), but I DO think it likely made me SX/SO, gave me that need to seek out real relationships because they were so lacking in my life. Had I been reared in a more functional and traditional household, I wonder if I might not have been SP or SO.

However, the variants seem very useful to me and don't even really have to be connected to the enneagram IMO.

Yeah, I prefer to think of the stacking more than the number. And I think I read recently on that main enneagram site that the variant should stand alone and need not be tied to type.

 

[Totenkindly]

@bold: how can you find enneagram to be "sort of like astrology" but not MBTI?

I consider astrology to be in a completely separate class.

MBTI tries to build off functional pairs, so it has a rational structure even if its assumptions are arguably inaccurate.

Enneagram also has a rationale behind in because the archetypes are hooked together through the directions of (dis)integration. You can see a replicable pattern between the types, although it's not clear if the archetypes provide even, complete coverage of the spectrum of people. But you can get a sense of what a THree is like, and how a Three will typically stress, and how a Three will typically actualize, all connected to the other archetypes.

Determining in a predictable fashion what someone is specifically like, however, based on when they were born, seems ridiculous to me. There is no pattern to discover; you can't really replicate results, you can't predict behavior, you can't show similarity between two people who were born at or nearly at the same time. Because of that, I put astrology in the realm of fortune cookies and daily devotionals -- all of which purpose to present a new life truth to the individual to consider. It doesn't matter what the life truth is. It's more like a delivery system to get people thinking.

 

[JocktheMotie]

I'm curious how your SXness manifests itself. I would agree that mine is detrimental to actual relationships. I scare people away, and not many can handle my intensity when I start opening up.

It's not that people "can't handle my intensity." I've always thought that garbage was NF language for being too needy and unstable for most people so they drop you or you drop them out of frustration. Which is what I think SilkRoad was referring too.

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 also tend to be rather transparent with regards to details about my life or personality simply because such things are meaningless to me and I am not protective of them. I don't have to maintain some kind of distance to be "safe" from people. While I can be hurt, my response to pain is to simply sever the connection and move elsewhere, which I haven't had and wouldn't have a problem doing.

Here's a good explanation of how sx/sp manifests for me as a 5.

This subtype has a lot in common the self-pres/sexual instinctual stacking. They experience many of the same internal conflicts surrounding relationships, the need for independence and emotional expression. The sexual/self-pres subtype differs however in being more intense, more counterphobic. They entertain more dark nihilistic ideas, ideas that most others don’t want to consider.

With this subtype, a lot of energy revolves around the issue of boundaries. Sexual/self-pres Fives tend to forge strong connections quickly and deeply, but if they feel betrayed, begin to feel overwhelmed, or if they feel that the connection doesn’t serve their true needs, can seem to cut the connection precipitously and “go cold.” They have high standards for significant others. They must feel that they can share their emotions with a significant other without being judged. This is their private world that they share. Relationships can be difficult, because individuals of this subtype will still want their own space and alone time, while at other times will want intense connection. Because the social instinct is least developed, this subtype is not very concerned with how others perceive them (except their intimates). This subtype is deceptive in that they may not seem to be especially intense - until they are engaged in a conversation they find interesting. Then the intensity and emotion become apparent. The internal struggle for this subtype is similar to that of the self-pres/sexual, but more energized and volatile, and getting to know this subtype means getting to know that.

When unhealthy, the energy of the sexual instinct can combine with the dominant type Five fixation to create a very impulsive Eight-like anger. The strength of their convictions can then come out quite forcefully.

 

[MacGuffin]

There is a weird attraction to other SX people.

This is not always a good thing.

 

[Totenkindly]

There is a weird attraction to other SX people.
This is not always a good thing.

Well, you know what it is... it's because both can meet each other's needs, like falling into each other's deep well.

Unfortunately, as you say, this isn't necessarily a great thing... it can become obsessive and self-referential.

 

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

It's not that people "can't handle my intensity." I've always thought that garbage was NF language for being too needy and unstable for most people so they drop you or you drop them out of frustration. Which is what I think SilkRoad was referring too.

mkay. And I think the bolded is a typical T invalidation regarding another's feelings. I know you aren't necessarily speaking to me, but if someone misjudges and think my intensity is clingy or needy or unstable, then they are making a false assumption based on inadequate information. I personally see no reason to 'drop someone' just because they are intense. People are not so disposable to me. I think that when people back down from intensity, it's likely not because an NF is too unstable but that the person needing to back down does not have good facility with his/her boundaries, or the communication needed to assert his/her boundaries.

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 also tend to be rather transparent with regards to details about my life or personality simply because such things are meaningless to me and I am not protective of them. I don't have to maintain some kind of distance to be "safe" from people. While I can be hurt, my response to pain is to simply sever the connection and move elsewhere, which I haven't had and wouldn't have a problem doing.

I appreciate your explanation. I've felt this same way to a large degree, sometimes wanting to know the other person better, or sometimes wanting them to know me better. Sometimes I prefer to express my feelings physically with them, and have them know me emotionally, and sometimes I prefer to just share mutually non physically.

I wonder if the bolded is really reflective of personality, or reflective of a reactionary behavior to some past hurt or emo baggage. I don't know why SX needs to be selfish at all. I'm not intending to be rude, I'm just trying to separate out the actual expression of SX from perhaps more personal issues. I can see the wanting to get inside others as being SX, and the not needing to feel safe to get close, but it seems to me the dropping people part and not giving a care is a bit off, and not necessarily SX. Would you care to elaborate more on that?

 

[JocktheMotie]

Perhaps, that explanation I quoted was specific to a 5 [I don't know what you are] and the explanation I gave was just how it works for me. Personally I've found it difficult to separate aspects of the variants from the type fixations. Knowing if something was the result of sp instinct vs. general type 5 protectiveness and disassociation was difficult.

Again, this is just for me, but I'm attuned to the qualities of the connection I have with people, not that specific person. I don't value the person per se, I value the connection. And that connection can typically come from anyone. Is that sx? The desire for the connection might be, but perhaps the dehumanizing part is something else. I don't think it's emotional baggage though. My upbringing was remarkably normal.

 

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

Perhaps, that explanation I quoted was specific to a 5 [I don't know what you are] and the explanation I gave was just how it works for me. Personally I've found it difficult to separate aspects of the variants from the type fixations. Knowing if something was the result of sp instinct vs. general type 5 protectiveness and disassociation was difficult.

Again, this is just for me, but I'm attuned to the qualities of the connection I have with people, not that specific person. I don't value the person per se, I value the connection. And that connection can typically come from anyone. Is that sx? The desire for the connection might be, but perhaps the dehumanizing part is something else. I don't think it's emotional baggage though. My upbringing was remarkably normal.

Interesting. Maybe this reflects the difference in SX dom for T and F types. I care a lot about the person. When you say attuned to the qualities of the connection can you be more specific? I'm not sure I notice that as much, as just using whatever means is necessary to connect to a particular person. But it seems very dependent on the person for me. Like I don't think I can connect with just anyone, unless that person has a certain something that I haven't figured out yet....maybe it's SX or maybe it's something else. I'm new to this so I'm still hashing through it all.

I still think your ability to move on and not really care about that person is odd, as in unhealthy. Just because you are a T or e 5 or whatever, doesn't seem like a good excuse to be able to throw someone away without feeling remorse. Maybe you mean something different than I'm interpreting. Maybe you mean just the natural moving on that occurs once you explore someone and the thrill is gone. haha. Or maybe you have some affective disorder. I'm just flinging some shit at you but srsly, should that really be accepted as normal and okay--or is that some sort of dysfunction?

 

[JocktheMotie]

Interesting. Maybe this reflects the difference in SX dom for T and F types. I care a lot about the person. When you say attuned to the qualities of the connection can you be more specific? I'm not sure I notice that as much, as just using whatever means is necessary to connect to a particular person. But it seems very dependent on the person for me. Like I don't think I can connect with just anyone, unless that person has a certain something that I haven't figured out yet....maybe it's SX or maybe it's something else. I'm new to this so I'm still hashing through it all.

Maybe. I'm not that great with enneagram either. And I certainly don't think these things work in isolation. When I say attuned to the qualities of the connection, I mean that I desire a certain type of information exchange, expression, and energy from the other person. I'm not really interested in the details of the person so much as I am interested in the manner we interact. I actually think we're describing the same thing here, but with T and F flavors. You emphasize the personal qualities, I do not.

I still think your ability to move on and not really care about that person is odd, as in unhealthy. Just because you are a T or e 5 or whatever, doesn't seem like a good excuse to be able to throw someone away without feeling remorse. Maybe you mean something different than I'm interpreting. Maybe you mean just the natural moving on that occurs once you explore someone and the thrill is gone. haha. Or maybe you have some affective disorder. I'm just flinging some shit at you but srsly, should that really be accepted as normal and okay--or is that some sort of dysfunction?

Yeah, I've gotten that before. And my family has brought it up as an issue. I'm not really making an excuse though. It's just what I do, and have done before. I've told this story a bunch of times so it's probably starting to get old, but I had a best childhood friend for like 10 years, and the moment we went to different high schools...I never really bothered seeing him again. Found new friends and people. It sent him to therapy and everything, my mom told me as she tried to guilt me into seeing him again.

It doesn't affect my life in a real negative manner, so I'm not sure if it's a disorder. I may not be able to hold on to people well, but I don't really need to either.

 

[Totenkindly]

Yeah, I've gotten that before. And my family has brought it up as an issue. I'm not really making an excuse though. It's just what I do, and have done before. I've told this story a bunch of times so it's probably starting to get old, but I had a best childhood friend for like 10 years, and the moment we went to different high schools...I never really bothered seeing him again. Found new friends and people. It sent him to therapy and everything, my mom told me as she tried to guilt me into seeing him again.

How'd he feel about it? Did he have the same feeling you did?

 

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

Maybe. I'm not that great with enneagram either. And I certainly don't think these things work in isolation. When I say attuned to the qualities of the connection, I mean that I desire a certain type of information exchange, expression, and energy from the other person. I'm not really interested in the details of the person so much as I am interested in the manner we interact. I actually think we're describing the same thing here, but with T and F flavors. You emphasize the personal qualities, I do not.

Hmmm......I like it when we (lol like general 'we') can talk about things that you don't normally talk about in normal conversations, like skipping the small talk and going deeper, joking, talking about subjects you would normally be reticent to discuss. It's not often you can find someone who is willing to do this, in my experience. So my criteria is that the person can do this. But when I interact, I start to attach as well. Maybe that is where the difference lies. Maybe you don't do the attachment part, therefore you don't really ever detach, whereas the other person might perceive it as such for his/herself. But, yeah, I don't care generally what the person likes/dislikes/looks like, etc., but it does matter that they can connect with me in this way most of all. So I guess it is the same.

Yeah, I've gotten that before. And my family has brought it up as an issue. I'm not really making an excuse though. It's just what I do, and have done before. I've told this story a bunch of times so it's probably starting to get old, but I had a best childhood friend for like 10 years, and the moment we went to different high schools...I never really bothered seeing him again. Found new friends and people. It sent him to therapy and everything, my mom told me as she tried to guilt me into seeing him again.

It doesn't affect my life in a real negative manner, so I'm not sure if it's a disorder. I may not be able to hold on to people well, but I don't really need to either.

This makes me laugh for some reason, isn't that horrible? Just the way you describe this with such detachedness strikes me as ironic or something. Poor friend. haha. I wish I had some of that gene or whatever. Twould make my life easier, surely.

 

[JocktheMotie]

How'd he feel about it? Did he have the same feeling you did?

No, he actually did get really depressed and go into therapy. Apparently came out that a lot of his pain was derived from us going to different schools and the demise of our friendship.

So he did not take it well. Not sure what he's like now though. Family has seen him around town and say to me, "He looks like he's doing well!" to which I have no response. Okay, great?

 

[Totenkindly]

No, he actually did get really depressed and go into therapy. Apparently came out that a lot of his pain was derived from us going to different schools and the demise of our friendship.

So he did not take it well. Not sure what he's like now though. Family has seen him around town and say to me, "He looks like he's doing well!" to which I have no response. Okay, great?

Okay. I just wanted to ask because 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. SP tendencies make it difficult to extend past the borders of the daily structure if it takes an energy investment.

And then as soon as we are within proximity again, it's like we never left.

I think it's rather like creating a model of the other person inside of you -- you know how they think and how they would respond and "who they are" -- and so even if you are not around each other, it's not like they're really gone per se.

I thought perhaps if your friend was okay with it, then it could be something like this, but it sounds like he took it much differently.

 

[JocktheMotie]

Yeah, I have to say I'd actually be a bit hesitant if he ever contacted me and wanted to hang out again. Like you I think I can do that same thing, but having known how it affected him I feel like he's delicate and I'd break him again or something. Very puzzling.