-compilation of random notes on the instincts
Soc = air & sunlight, wind, atmosphere
Sx = fire, electricity, lightening, ignition
Sp = earth, ground, dust, coal
sx/sp- muddy, lava-like, piercing
sp/sx- earthy, down-to-earth, grounding
sx/so- sunny, fiery, inciting
so/sx- airy, translucent, connecting
so/sp - soapy, dry, elevating
sp/so - grounded, light, fruitful
Soc = 'active masculine' - Apollo
Sx = 'active feminine' - Venus/Dionysus
Sp = neutral (contained/solipsistic)
sp=childhood, this is when we need resources to grow and feel protected
sx=late teens/adulthood, this is when we link to others and create our own families
soc=mature age, once our own children have grown up we engage in the wider social issues of our community
Writing styles by instinct:
Sp/soc: Most straightforward in language, with relatively little trills and embellishments. Points made directly and from personal experience. Business-like and clear. Can be cynical. Attuned to the financial underbelly. Lacking in internal experience compared to other stackings. Woeing and lamenting personal experiences that are lacking, missing, or foregone and never to be fixed or recovered.
Sp/sx: Comes out as somewhat removed, heavy, yet personal and captivating - giving off a suffocating, insular, emotionally extinguishing vibe, as if their internal world is wrapped around by an impermeable membrane. Strong sensory impressions designed to awake emotions and sexuality. Makes one want to linger on one or two lines forever.
Soc/sp: Tangential. Very in-their-head and intellectual in their analyses. Comes across as level-headed and unspontaneous, but also extending inclusiveness and personal warmth towards others. Lacking in discernment of emotional nuances, may appear unwitting, material, and coarse in their approach of personal relationships. Their written works often require a great deal of mental concentration from the readers.
Soc/sx: The word "fantastical" comes to mind. Lots of virtuosity and trills, and often removed from the real world. One is whirled away by the dazzling fairies of their colorful imagination. Can be too rich in imagery for their own good. Sustained dramatic power due to their knowledge of interpersonal dynamics.
Sx/sp: Intense, often a stab-in-the-chest sensation, leaving me in tears without knowing why. Fantastical but much more concentrated in a few inner images. Can be abstract, animating dead objects into their field of contemplation. Embodiment of another human, thing, or idea is common in their writings. Talking of their personal thoughts and experiences, while forgetting to include others.
Sx/soc: My impression of their writing is "fire-and-ice", as if one is to experience the extremes of heat and coldness at the same time. Often abstract, spilling one inner vision after another like a dream-sequence. Seems particularly in touch with the core meaning of life and death.
Why do sx/so's project open sexual energy?
-sx/soc's establish status and relate to others through emotion and sexuality
so ---> into ---> sx
Why do so/sx's like cultivating friendship bonds?
-soc/sx's infuse sexuality into social relations
sx ---> into ---> so
Why do so/sp's monitor the collective well being?
-soc/sp's project survival consciousness into the social realm
sp ---> into ---> so
Why are sp/so's the backbone of society?
-sp/so's develop and manage resources that benefit the community
so ---> into ---> sp
Why are sp/sx's sensitively attuned to their environment?
-sp/sx's inject sexuality into their surroundings
sx ---> into ---> sp
Why do sx/sp's seem saturated with intensity?
-sx/sp's gain stability by withholding strong sexual impulses
sp ---> into ---> sx
sp/so – Has a sense for being appropriate in social situations. Protects themselves through following and insisting upon civility, general politeness, or professional norms. Doesn't modulate their personal energy widely. Keeps even, consistent, and sturdy. Has a tracking instinct for the underbellies ('shadowside') of society and governments with respect to finance and resource mismanagement. What they take in through their senses gets filtered through cynicism. Tends towards masculine hobbies and pursuits. Savers, collectors, people who find ways to make contributions to (or oppose) their community without being conspicuous or to have genuinely transgressed. Has a more refined sense of implementing reverse crowd psychology than sp/sx.
Posted - 29 Oct 2010 : 11:55:25 AM
There's something of a 'patriot' 'complier' theme here - I'm using the word loosely for lack of a better one. The social landscape (so) i.e. social mores, culture, traditions, impregnates the physical land (sp) with a given charge for sp/so's. The physical space becomes the natural subject of a communal protective drive. Sp = body/earth, thus the history (so) of a place is sensed viscerally, and the sx-instinct is sublimated into a kind of social romance with the land. I.e.- Social 'air' breathes into sp 'earth'.
A lot of politicians are this type. On the neurotic side, you can see how an initial inspiration of duty-to-the-land can begin to take an sp-first turn into materialism, "Gimme my stuff", and thus the classic inner conflict of the politician: once elected they're getting sp and soc-needs met (salary, perks, social standing), and the choice between maintaining the steady stream of sp ('me-first') benefits and service to the so (the 'greater good').
Posted - 29 Oct 2010 : 1:36:39 PM
Perhaps "fatherland" is the word you're looking for? I know it's loaded with a host of unwanted connotations, though.
Posted - 29 Oct 2010 : 3:39:34 PM
'Fatherland' is right on the money. After I posted I thought "the land of our forefathers". Soc and 'Father' are natural associations. If soc is rightly associated with Air, it links with the astrological association of Air-signs with intellect and 'the Masculine'.
Sp is partly about environment. To contrast sp/so environments with those of sp/sx: sp/sx conflates sex and death (as does sx/sp) and therefore has rulership over the womb and the coffin - two places with essentially no air. Sp/so is common ground - the town square, the church, the arching open-air expanse between birth and death.
In this stanza from the Star-Spangled Banner, there's a naturally-occurring contrast between an sp/sx space with an sp/so space. Notice how the air (the wind) is the sign that 'all is right' in the world, and that 'our foe' is bad because they live in an eerie place that has no wind (sp/sx). Our glory comes when the sun brings the wind to spread the flag out high and straight, for all to see:
On the shore dimly seen thro' the mists of the deep,
Where the foe's haughty host in dread silence reposes,
What is that which the breeze, o'er the towering steep,
As it fitfully blows, half conceals, half discloses?
Now it catches the gleam of the morning's first beam,
In full glory reflected, now shines on the stream:
'Tis the star-spangled banner: O, long may it wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!
Posted - 19 Jun 2011 : 04:41:30 AM
I see sp/soc likened to 'watchdog' or 'guard'. Not just in 6s, but other types as well. Sp/soc 6 is probably the most security oriented of all types (there might be an interest in enforcement of conduct).
Posted - 18 May 2011
... my twin brother (sp/so) likes his room as light as possible. He has, like, 10 lamps in his room. I think sp/so might want an airy environment, which would be sparse and clean ...
Posted - 06 Nov 2010 : 9:42:49 PM
Politics is usually associated with so/sp and business with sp/so. I think sp-subtype would be more inclined to make difficult decisions regarding the economy.
Posted - 09 Apr 2012 : 1:58:52 PM
I don't associate soc-firstness with social finesse/polish/graces. In fact, soc-firsts are often 'culture warriors', like Bill O'Reilly or Glenn Beck or Art Skidmore. The Apollonian light, in this case, has a desperation to it - emphasis on enlightenment.
The interest is in sending light where there is a claim of enlightenment so as to show that there is in fact really darkness there. In other words, the search party (made of light) has now inadvertently (yet advertently) lit up the space that was, in their opinion, not genuinely light-filled (or enlightened). [example: spark inside us song]
Like all neurosis, it has a circular quality to it, where the soc-first person is attracted to someone who is giving off light, and yet such enlightenment is seen, by the soc-first, as a high status position, i.e.- something the soc-first is envious of. And hence the impulse is to, you might say, double the light to uncover 'truth' and bring photographic exposure into darkness, so as to bring the other person down, status-wise.
Posted - 09 Apr 2012 : 1:58:52 PM
So/sp has a 'health of the community' (neurotic) focus. So/sp, with the group-welfare focus, becomes 'bug exterminator'. It's the classic witch hunt motif...because so/sp also has a pseudo-religious/cultural overtone.
Posted - 01 Aug 2009 : 2:42:50 PM
I think of SO/SP as having a dry deepness that can seem either warm, romantic, and resonant, or cold and cynical, depending on the mood and circumstance of the individual. Writers Virginia Woolf and Marcel Proust (4w5 and 4w3, respectively) are often typed as SO/SP, and in reading their work, we see a tendency towards the hypotactic; sprawling, elaborate descriptions with rich concepts, heavy use of subordinate clauses, and an intellectual, often aphoristic attention to rhythm and structure. With SX last, intimacy is an area of deficiency, and people of this stacking often struggle to some degree with maintaining romantic relationships. The central focus is on role within a group
Posted - 01 Jan 2014
"Anyway, I keep picturing all these little kids playing some game in this big field of rye and all. Thousands of little kids, and nobody's around - nobody big, I mean - except me." "I like it when somebody gets excited about something. It's nice." - J.D. Salinger's so/sp (sx-last) dilemmas.
Posted - 02 Aug 2009 : 02:40:35 AM
so/sp has a drunkenness of words.... which makes for a certain flavor of ego-inflation. Think 'hot air' and the subsequent rise of the balloon. So/sp has a distinct dryness to it - it's removed somehow from the environment, raised up high, untouchable.
Posted - 14 Aug 2009 : 10:09:09 PM
So/sp seems to want to "change the earth with the voice". [Again, earth = sp. Voice = air = soc.] And since sx is last, the interest is generally in pragmatic structural change. To me, this is where the political animal tag is coming from. Regalness also comes through as a tone here. Air is high and mighty ("Putting on airs"). And communal sunlight strikes a kingly note, as the Sun is a classic 'king' symbol. 'Communal' then refers to the king's royal subjects (the society).
Posted - 09 Jun 2011 3:37:05 PM
Recall that I live with a so/sp 9. Now, this explains why we have the UN Declaration of Human Rights tacked to the back of our bathroom door. Additionally, on our fridge, we have our very own Household Declaration of Roommate Rights.
I have a lot of issues with the so/sp mindset. It seems that they are the group-defenders, but the feeling I get is that while defending the group they don't mind weeding out those individuals who don't match up to the group ideals. In this case, the group ideal was highly 9w1ish, and since I was the least prone to keeping my mouth shut even though I was more willing to pull my own weight, I think I quickly was seen as a threat. What I see with strong so/sp's is a pointlessly neurotic defense of the group.
So/sp quote: "...in my head my agenda was, that everyone was now going to know me and understand me and be my friend and I was going to be able to walk into a room and not feel so shy because everyone was going to know what kind of person I was and how I was feeling inside... but instead of becoming very understood and accepted that I became so wildly misunderstood and unaccepted that it really screwed with my head...I'm a very very sensitive person, you can't knock me down with a feather anymore but you can still make me cry pretty easy, but I was miserable...I'm not an extremely social creature and I certainly wasn't one then..."
Posted - 23 Jul 2009 : 02:03:15 AM
Sx/so is the "social revolutionary" stacking - leaning more toward cultural change than political change, IMO, though the two are obviously not mutually exclusive. [So/sp seems like the bigger player in the area of socio-political/governmental change.] With the soc-variant in second position, sx-first energy is more phallic, a concentrated cluster of nerves [sx] leaning forward, poking at the collective emotional space [soc]; introducing heat which causes molecular agitation in social groups, probing and forcing psychological exposure. And without the self-protective 'pullback' from sp concerns, it's a "no holes barred" scenario.
The soc mid-position means that the social arena is a "neutral pool", ripe for seduction and seizure, swelling up into high polarized waves from the sx-energy...big ebbs-and-flows of attraction and repulsion. In, out, in, out... [Schwing.]
Again, depending on the E-type, sp-lastness can make the sx/so-person largely oblivious to the degree to which his revolution threatens his own survival. Thus, the person's subconscious attitude is 'Full steam ahead'. Stick raw powerlines of sx-first into the electrically-conductive water of the social pool, and stagnant waters have no choice but to start poppin' and crackin'.
IME, the sx/so person will sometimes counteract the above social-dilution by use of various kinds of exhibitionism. Besides the use of literal (physical) exposure, difficult or unsettling types of psycho-emotional exposure proffer a charged vulnerability reminiscent of genital exposure (displaying what is sensitive - a high concentration of nerve) which has no choice but to be registered as 'sexual' in the subconscious (or semi-conscious) of the observer. This then is a way to foist reactivity into the crowd, and kick off an electrical storm which corrects the feeling of diluted sx-energy.
Energetic qualities associated with sx/so: ripping, tearing, destroying, breaking, burning, disapproving, disobeying, dismissing, ridiculing, alienating, crowing, ranting, screaming, displaying, exposing, joining, embodying, asserting, confronting, changing, reinventing, transforming, breaking through, leaving behind, going overboard
fire (sx)+ gas (so) = human blowtorch
Posted - 08 May 2011 : 1:12:59 PM
If you look at Dylan (sx/so 4w5) and Lennon (sx/so 5w4), their 'revolution' was about consciousness-raising. A social revolution around awareness (5w4w5).
Sx-first energy has the high electrical voltage that gets the big wheel turning (revolutions). And with sx/so, sx concentrates the splayed directionality of 'the social' into an arrow tip, giving direction and arc. The potential to move/mobilize large groups or generations.
Posted - 08 May 2011 : 1:37:57 PM
Agreed. There's an sx/so 3w4 in my life, who definitely is comfortable in the larger-than-life god realm. Also, I realize an 8w7 in my family (a type of patriarch) was sx/so, as well.
Posted - 08 May 2011 : 4:03:05 PM
I've known a couple sx/so who didn't really have this god-like energy... their energy was sharp but not big and excitable. I did have sx/so 1w2 professor who was extremely entertaining and dominated the room, but definitely not someone you could really have a conversation with... he was really set in his opinions and not open to exploration. The thing about people with this stacking is they can be overwhelming and then underwhelming... curiously lacking in substance. They're very exuberant, all their energy gets shot outward, but there's a hole underneath. They go outwards, not downwards.
Sx/so: 1) physically moves into people when interactions are on a one-to-one basis 2) is elitist but acts convincingly egalitarian 3) is open to being with everyone but focuses on specific people 4) is very respectful to everyone but only truly respects a few people, and wants to help humanity.
Posted - 27 Nov 2011 : 7:52:42 PM
SO/SX for me, as I experience it, and as I have experienced members of my family (particularly destructive ones: of all types) is as following:
- Wide, ubiquitous presence, hard to grasp, up-in-the-air, wishy-washy, wide-ranging passion and interest
- Inherent kind of intensity about others - engaging them, understanding them; seems to 'relax' among people, not necessarily engaging them just spending time with people for them is like being in a hot, relaxing bath
- Arguable, but often an inherent sense of sophistication, appreciation of arts and love of the 'cultural conversation'; inherently moral - awareness of large social causes taken seriously (sexism, racism, political repression); love of humanities, law, history, European culture, anything where so/sx can feel a part of the ghostly whispers of thousands of people that have walked the same earth, may have been writing the same poetry...
- Dangerously magnetic charisma, perfected, elegant social appearance & competence, ability to make everyone relax, often floats from group to group or person to person with grace and ease, feeling close to no one while inspiring others to feel close to them; selectivity within social sphere; inherent kind of social elegance makes for a pickier person
- Focus on the importance of others in your life: that one friend, your family, that small group of people that experienced such and such with you, loyalty for such
- Acute emotional perception and 'people awareness', they readily share these perceptions with others, so can make for spell-binding councelors, life-coaches, etc.
- Seemingly grounded or 'salt of the earth' because vision is so 'wide' so can cover all bases, but in actuality not grounded at all.
- When more stressed: love of connection can lead to compulsive, impulsive spending, organising trips away with family (the combination of a loved one and a best friend is like taking crystal meth), the type that will splash out on a yacht to give to close knit community without thinking has to go home and re-mortgage the house ... enforced fun, expensive, personalised events for 'special few'/small community let in by so/sx
- Dependency on small community around, needs the collective voice to steer
- The social world (i.e. culture, history, media) is A-sexual so, when stressed, the SO/SX can inherent this A-sexual world and struggle to build romantic relationships. This can be confusing for other people because the intensity of intellectual and emotional connection i.e. friendship, may lend itself to romance but nothing happens
- Stressed and dark SO/SX form many of these borderline connections, dupe others into thinking the so/sx is a wise, cultural kind of Gandalf, but it's a lie
- A desperate need to be 'seen' leads to a kind of unhealthy forgetting of one's own voice and individuality - possibility of GAD, ADHD, full-blown dissociation
- Effective at creating a socially competent/fluent/friendly image while in reality severely struggling and losing balance; may adopt/fake beliefs to match external ones, compulsive lying, manipulation, anger
- 'Pure OCD', Separation Anxiety, Borderline Personality Disorder i.e. incredibly obsessive friendship, think: Single White Female, can obsess over one particular connection for years until the cosmetic romance of the thing has destroyed any authentic center.
Posted - 28 Nov 2011 : 01:26:24 AM
So/sx is an interesting energy. It seems to be all about the narrative and symbiotic needs. Image story theater and, the story. Very clever and hyper-observant of others, can be constantly manipulative in an obsessive way, planing and working to gain what they want from others, networking on cruise control, happy to tell white lies and bend a story for a desired outcome. Honesty comes second to symbiotic needs. Skilled in the application of communication skills as a tool and charm and grace in a comforting way for people to relax and trust the interlace of the so/sx.
They respect the values they practice and detest the opposite to the values they celebrate, while holding court with friends and intermits. Without contextual awareness of the dynamic they chose to ignore out of minds they focus with contempt and dislike, their attitudes to word the recalcitrant other. But they are careful to hide their dislike behind a mask of congenial cordial actions.
If one is compatible with the so/sx in interests and sheared values, they are one of the most insightful and interesting and entertaining people to converse with and truly care about other people and seek to shear there understanding via gentle connection of mind and hart.
I like so/sx they are the salt of the earth, delightful and easy to be with.
Posted - 28 Nov 2011 : 06:11:18 AM
'Symbiotic and narrative' is absolutely great, and key. It's kind of symbiotic-forced-merging, like a river carving its way into the side of a somewhat unwilling mountain. The symbiotic nature of friendship (not as inherently important as sx and sp relationships) is what's missing in the acceptance part of so/sx.
Very true to themselves in all their madness. The Greatest Host - the type people fall in love with, the most passionate type, the most capable externally and incapable internally: the most Jeckyl and Hyde.
Posted - 09 Jan 2011 : 4:54:05 PM
So/sx is the most feminine stacking- soft, gentle, bouncy, sparkling, glowing, friendly, endearing.
Posted - 19 Jul 2008 : 08:37:00 AM
So/sx stack, to me, is the least sober. Sp imparts some grounding, so when it's last, it feels like there's not a place to plug into practicality. And sx/so at least has some focused drive (even, perfectionism) from the sx-firstness.
So, so/sx is a bit of a flailing madman. Again, sx adds a certain kind of messiness to a stack, and with soc-first, you've got someone who smears themselves across the social landscape, or something.... Just how messy an so/sx is will depend on the E-type, of course. Jacobs may be getting a good bit of help from his 3-wing to get sh|t done. I've been working with an so/sx 7w6 for the last year, and I don't think he knows where the floor is .....
Posted - 20 Oct 2010 : 11:25:16 AM
I think it's a misconception to say that SO-first types all like small talk. I absolutely hate it too, maybe because I'm an SO-SX, but I feel like if I can't make a deep connection with people, life's too short to waste it on small talk. I would also rather spend most of the party with one person I have some connection with over circulating in the group. If there's no "connection" person out there, then circulating is next on the list but I would still rather find one or maybe two people I had something deeply in common with rather than ending up making small talk all night because that can tedious even if you're an SO-first. I would say that it's fair to say that SO-firsts have social anxiety, but only insofar as they want to be liked an accepted. Most are not "anxious" in the usual sense in social situations since usually they've already worked out a lot about how social situations work.
Posted - 24 Jan 2005 : 05:55:07 AM
Picture a lightning bolt captured in a bottle. The energy is always there but it's contained in a glass jar and only breaks free once in a while. The sx/sp is boxed in energy, self-contained, cutting, and focused. Sx/sp types will often look angry even when they are not. There is a certain reality of emotion which they display that is due to their social obliviousness. Most sx's will be honest almost to a fault. Sx/sp want to choose their friends wisely. A "with me or against me" attitude reminiscent of 6 and 8s. The least inhibited of all stackings. Cares less of what others think of them. The most likely to get into physical altercations, and may even enjoy fighting. Healthy sx/sp's will display a playful selfishness.
Sx/sp have a inner confidence which is not usually found in other stackings. However they may lack social confidence or just may not pay any attention to social rituals at all. Put a sx/sp in a busy bar and they will be confident in themselves. But make them sit at their parent-in-laws for a formal family dinner and you wont see that same confidence. It's inner confidence rather than social confidence of the sx/so. May be very popular without knowing or putting emphasis on it, unlike so types.
Posted - 04 Aug 2010 : 4:04:43 PM
Sx/sp does create a kind of isolationary tendency though even in extroverted types, an in-their-own-world vibe, kinda oblivious sometimes. But ironically they can also be extremely insistent and aggressive on issues they feel strongly about, which they go on in the soc realms in ways that will cause stronger soc's to cringe, it's so rough and undiplomatic. They can fall in love with their soapboxes.
Posted - 19 Apr 2012 : 2:30:50 PM
sp/sx, and, to some degree sx/sp, have an attraction to 'underbellies' - places where the sun don't shine. like sensing a disgusting odor (death, feces) and feeling compelled to go toward it and peer into it, rather than move away.
Posted - 18 Apr 2007 : 04:00:23 AM
What I really hate is the people with a higher social acting like I'm a bull in a china shop every time I try to say anything. My sister (6w7 so/sp) is horrible about this, sometimes reacting to every comment I make as though I'm the most horrid, uncouth thing imaginable, and in addition taking everything as some kind of slam or insult, when I'm just talking normally and not thinking anything insulting at all. My 9w1 so/sx ex was also really bad about acting like I was social death, and frequently giving me the feeling that everybody was mad at me or something. I think he was just on guard for potential areas of conflict, though, because sometimes I'd find that nobody was upset with me at all.
Posted - 18 Apr 2007 : 04:19:00 AM
I also do the tuning out of conversations, too. Reacting suddenly when someone says something interesting, then snapping back to my inner focus whenever it gets boring. It's upset more than one person, that habit. Also, making the odd crude joke, in bad taste. Or a faux pas, where I don't know it's the wrong thing to say until Afterwards.
Posted - 18 Apr 2007 : 3:08:02 PM
I see my sx & sp instincts are really close in strength – My sx manifests as strong drives towards pleasure, new experiences, personal transformations, spontaneity, being provocative and in the spotlight, flaunting to impress, extravagance, and unrealistic romantic fantasies and whims. But my sp counters with worries, fears, practical downers, erecting walls, a need to hide and be secretive, and needs to conserve time, space, and energy.
Posted - 19 Apr 2007 : 4:10:36 PM
Merging is immersing yourself in another person, tasting their soul, reveling in their essence. It's not about giving up your identity, though when you merge with someone, they become a part of you, in a sense. The connection becomes part of what makes up you, so if you have to break the connection it's like ripping out a part of yourself. The deeper the bond - the deeper and more painful the ripping. With myself, if something seems like it could really hurt me, I'll get very skittish, like an unbroken horse, always on guard and looking to bolt. If someone doesn't give me the feel the relationship is going to wind up hurting me, I'll dive into the attachment, then have a really hard time breaking it if I see the need to. I guess that's why I get so defensive in the first place, because I know how much it hurts to tear out a piece of myself...but people can and do sneak in there by making me feel especially secure.
Posted - 24 Mar 2006 : 04:08:19 AM
Type 7 sx/sp: The self-pres adds a greater tendency towards introspection and also a stronger focus to the 7. Though I do often have problems focusing, at other times I am able to focus a great deal - enough to spend a great deal of time reading and researching topics I find interesting. I am also pretty introspective, particularly compared to most 7w6's. Although I've experimented with plenty of substances, I've never become addicted to anything. There's a part of me that always pulls me back when I see my life going down the toilet. My weak social radar makes me worry sometimes: "am I pissing people off?" I'm still in the habit of asking, after leaving some kind of gathering, "Did I offend anyone?" because, really, I don't have a clue. In my case, it's less of a desire to fit into the group than it is a sense of sheer bewilderment "why doesn't she like me?" I find this person interesting, I'm doing my connection thing, and it's failing miserably for no discernible to me reason. I am not really concerned with everyone liking me, but when it's someone I want to connect with and the connection is missing, that does bug me.
Posted - 15 Nov 2009 : 10:29:56 PM
I have found that the Sp is kind of a good buddy to me. When I remember to visit 'him', he make me feel less needy and more self-sufficient. I love to indulge in Sx themes though. I get a high from being "unsafe". A lot of times I've surprised myself how I don't get scared in unsafe situations, but rather have this "bring it on" inside, and I let go, and the result is euphoric almost. I surprise myself with that, because I'm not at all like that "by nature". "By nature" I'm an uptight boring dorky girl. My secret motivation that has pretty much pulled me through my life is to be wanted. I'm also attracted to being an adventurer. I've spent my whole life making myself be perfect for someone. Not because I want to do everything for them, but because I want them to want me. I've had an unhealthy belief that I can survive only if I have a man.
Posted - 16 Nov 2009 : 10:26:39 PM
I have the same unhealthy belief. I have to be wanted, desired. I was terrified today of getting a haircut. There's always this feeling that it has the power to make me ugly, make me a monster. Well, if they screw it up. It's like your whole self-worth is on the line. Not a very fun experience.
Posted - 11 May 2011 : 10:57:31 PM
I like 'ice' metaphor because it's prismatic, i.e.- exponentiating Light, which I associate with soc (besides air). Ice is also crystallization, which points to sx's essential relationship with transmogrification/metamorphosis. Sx/sp having something to do with self-alchemy. Base self (earth) into gold.
The "hungry ghosts": "Whereas hells are prisons, the hungry ghost was in a place without walls. Because the locus of its punishment was coextensive with its own body and in fact, constituted that body, the need for walls was gone. These damned were free to wander the world at will because they could never escape their own bodies. … In the case of the hungry ghost, it is not what is done to the body that causes pain but the received structure of the body itself that virtually hurt like hell." When unhealthy, the sx/sp's might find themselves in a world where they are famished, driven away by those they want most, left alone to wander in their air-tight prison they so want to break free from, abandoning their all-consuming hopes, turning the forceful energy inwards once again having to weather the violent storms alone, defeated. The hungrier they are, the more likely they are to starve. For they might begin to grasp at mirages in the desert, light on the ocean floor. They will seize it with all they have." - William LaFleur
Posted - 15 Aug 2012 : 11:59:30 AM
Sp/sx has a self-undermining undertow current. That slow slurping sucking sound in the basement. Curls them into themselves, and actually away from outer resources (soc-world). The lack of air makes the pool stagnant; it festers, expands/ferments, gets hotter and hotter. Sx charged static ping-ponging inside the hard sp shell -- the release valves sealed off by the shell. A pressure cooker. The anger is partly at how the self is diminishing the self -- hollowing out (from the inside) the strength of the sp wall/boundary.
Posted - 19 Aug 2011 : 4:17:00 PM
Sp/sx always feels like there's a membrane around them. It takes a bit for what you said to sink into them. And when they 'give' you something, it's like that bit has hit their membrane and bounced back at them back and fourth for a while, stewing in itself, before reaching you.
Posted - 23 Apr 2011 : 09:56:23 AM
Sp/sx also has an inverted narcissism - perhaps distorted exhibitionism is more accurate. There's an impulse to open the raincoat and reveal cancerous lesions covering the torso and genitalia. Festering wounds with a stench. It sometimes seems to be a challenge issued around deep, deep bonding: "This is me; How real are you willing to be?" Psychic nudity/revelation that, in itself, threatens the sp/sx with self-destruction .. or at least social self-destruction, which is part of the distilling process toward the one-to-one uber-bond. There's an element of all that with sx in general but sp/sx, in this mode, prefers it truly organically grotesque, leaving a stain and a scar that's hard to interpret.
Posted - 19 Apr 2012 : 2:30:50 PM
Sp/sx - they are the earthy-underbelly, raw and real. They tend to track other peoples' underbellies, too, their hidden parts. Sp/sx (and to some degree, sx/sp) has an attraction to 'underbellies' - places where the sun don't shine. Sp/sx turn things inside out, themselves and others - to show the guts, the underbelly, the animal inside. But showing the underbelly can also get you gored.
sp/sx story of 'diminution': "I live alone now. The best way I can describe the last handful of years is like an enveloping circle getting smaller and smaller. The circle represents the people, opportunities and other things I access on a regular basis. Friends, family, opportunities, social networks, places I go, activities I do, etc. As I find myself getting more and more withdrawn, the more I choose the path of least resistence, and the tighter the circle of opportunity gets and the more I'm tying a noose around my own neck (figuratively)."
Posted - 15 Aug 2009 : 10:11:18 AM
Insularity is a big part of that stack; solipsism is an ideal. Image is still big in sp/sx 4, but on one level there's an oblivousness to the full impact of their public personae. This might be part of why they've been called 'dauntless'.
Posted - 24 Aug 2011 : 11:47:30 PM
I can relate to the sp/sx body language examples, the protected come hither especially. I also find myself posing or positioning my body a lot until I feel aesthetically comfortable with how I'm "arranged". "Just so". Like a cat. But yes, I do tend to pose. Am not sure how many sp/sx's I've known, but that's part of the element I see in some is a sort of natural but warm and heavy "firmth" that feels able to be posed (whether conscious or not).
Posted - 24 Aug 2011 : 11:47:30 PM
Sx in sp/sx strikes me as a certain kind of problem. It's a wet mess; a flame flaring up against its own will, brightening tall with exhibitionism and expanding red in shame. Imagine a fire beginning next to you, and your impulse is to extinguish it with a bucket of kerosene. Imagine not being able to un-know that that's how fires are put out, and the continual historical aftermaths left in your wake.
Posted - 26 Aug 2011 : 9:37:27 PM
sp/sx: Imagine a garden-like place where semi-eroticised psycho-emotional nudity is exchanged ... two people in an intimate space, sharing the same apple, transferring saliva and experiencing the cool inside of the fruit together, simultaneously. [This is sexual-second-ness.] ...At the same time, in the jungle of neurotic overemphasis, the boundary between you and other 'animals' is the imperative need, always on alert. The combined stew of these elements creates a certain style of vigilance and agitation.
The sexual energy, because of its underbelly of polar reactivity, smolders and some portion of it eventually sours in the tightly-sealed container (it's not given free flow); the bacteria creates a second burgeoning culture that presses at the seams, swelling with a fever. And because social is last, there's an unintelligence about how it looks from the outside, so 'the problem', in contrast to sp/so irritiability, takes on more offbeat forms, which tends to 'lose people'....without the loss fully registering.
Posted - 12 Mar 2009 : 09:31:20 AM
See above regarding 'revolution'. Sx-firsts want to stir up intensity - even in the introverted E-types. And the middle variant is generally a comfort zone, so you'd have an impulse to push things around in the social realm. As sp/sx, I like to push sexuality into my environment and I'll start to 'fall asleep' if there's no sexual crackle around. My sx-energy takes the form of an attraction to 'revolution', but as soc-last (and having a 1-wing), my impulse is toward complete reform' - yet, at the same time, ultimately, "Why bother with all those people. I'm not connected to them."
Stackemup sp/sx – Strives to be in tune with the earth’s "vital force". Drawn towards outlets/activities/images/themes where people and objects can be transmuted through such "vital force". Has a tracking instinct for the underbelly ("shadowside") of others. Lends a more personal touch to the environment. Point of view more internal and maximized by a fuller absorption into their own subjectivity. Sense of disconnect. Can form very strong bonds with a small circle of people and shut out the rest of the world. Outer actions are more "existential"; fully derived from their own inner world/point of view…most existential stacking. More uninhibited due to their absence of filter/awareness for the social, as if revealing private revelations. Self-destructs more than sp/so as their dark side turns into a roadshow. Emergence of archaic and crude expressions of enneagram type not uncommon.
Posted - 20 Jun 2011 : 12:31:55 PM
There's plenty in sp/sx that can make for sexual promiscuity. Think about it like this:
1) Largely inattentive to the full impact and implications engendered by one's reputation (soc-last)
2) bodily satisfaction and appetite is an over-focus (sp-first)
3) sx is play space where you sidestep much of your everyday neurosis
Also, porn and prostitution are sex-for-money (sx for an sp-dominant goal).
'Rotting' and 'decay' are also sp/sx themes (in both the literal and the abstract)...rendering moral degradation and various ways & means of slouching fetid self-destruction as potential reflexes.
And no, I'm not saying all sp/sx's are promiscuous.
Power dynamics is another sp/sx theme, no matter the e-type, and since sex has much to do with power, sexuality is one place where the sp-wall can manifest its ascendancy by blocking various kinds of outside emotional and sexual 'penetration'. In this case, the sexual awareness brought forth from being sx-second actually leads to avoidance of sx...on one level at least. This latter idea starts to get at the solipsism that's been associated with sp/sx.
sp/sx vs. sp/so
Posted - 22 Apr 2011 : 9:12:24 PM
sp/sx is infused with narcissism - sp/so with materialism
sp/sx wants to infect - sp/so wants to stay clean.
sp/sx will maintain their own boundaries, but is not as shy as sp/so in transgressing the boundaries of others.
sp/sx relates to the few significant others and shuns everyone else - sp/so generalizes people.
sp/sx has a more volatile emotional energy range - sp/so is very consistent and to the point.
sp/sx fills their surroundings with personal and refined touch - sp/so types clam up more when such opportunities arise.
Posted - 20 Oct 2011 : 10:49:45 PM
Sp/Sx has a kind of transparency that Sp/Po doesn't have.
The transparency of sp/sx is similar to the open exhibitionism of the Sx/So stacking, however, Sp/Sx isn't as deliberate in this. Sp/Sx transparency comes off as an "oops" - as a mistake where they have over-shared something personal in social unawareness.
'Transparency' also means a lack of social mask. There's a distinct lack of tact that is characteristic of social lasts. Whereas, sp/soc is much more tactful, appropriate and knowledgeable when to keep things in. Easier to see which people sp/sx favors, while sp/so is less disclosing and more utilitarian in this way.
Posted - 23 Apr 2011 : 09:56:23 AM
sp/sx also has an inverted narcissism (perhaps distorted exhibitionism is more accurate). There's an impulse to open the raincoat and reveal cancerous lesions covering the torso and genitalia. Festering wounds with a stench. It sometimes seems to be a challenge issued around deep, deep bonding: This is me; How real are you willing to be? Psychic nudity/revelation that, in itself, threatens the sp/sx with self-destruction....or at least social self-destruction, which is part of the distilling process toward the one-to-one uber-bond. There's an element of all that with sx in general but sp/sx, in this mode, prefers it truly organically grotesque, leaving a stain and a scar that's hard to interpret. [note that sp/so doesn't engage in such exhibitionism and doesn't 'turn itself inside out' as does sp/sx]
Posted - 15 Aug 2012 : 11:59:30 AM
sp/sx has a self-undermining undertow current. That slow slurping sucking sound in the basement. Curls them into themselves, and actually away from outer resources (soc-world). The lack of air makes the pool stagnant; it festers, expands/ferments, gets hotter and hotter.
Sx charged static ping-ponging inside the hard sp shell -- the release valves sealed off by the shell. A pressure cooker. The anger is partly at how the self is diminishing the self -- hollowing out (from the inside) the strength of the sp wall/boundary. [note that sp/so doesn't have this same undermining current, and being so-second they are not prone to 'hollow' themselves out]
Posted - 22 Apr 2011 : 9:12:24 PM
Hi, my name is relicquery and I'm a sp/so. I know I'm not a sp/sx because I care more about securing my legacy than I do about attracting my soulmate. I'm not good with intensity. In fact, it scares me. I may be socially awkward, but I am at least aware of the fact that I don't fit in, and I try to work around it. If I was sp/sx, I think I would probably not care about how socially retarded I am.
I am self-contained. People don't usually know what's going on inside me. I try to keep a polite exterior (though this fails when I'm overwhelmed). I think if I was sp/sx, I would not come across as dry and courteous. I might seem as moody as I feel.
If I was sp/sx, I would not spend all my energy trying to stabilize my life. I would spend more of it on things I like to do. Things I really want to do. If I was sp/sx, I might be able to act on my impulses. As sp/so, I often have to fight to not squash my impulses as they arise.
Posted - Posted - 29 Oct 2010 : 6:01:07 PM
I've always thought of sp/soc's as cooperative and involved, but in a remote, detached way. Comparing them to their immediate stacking siblings (sp/sx and soc/sp), sp/soc works with others much more easily than the sp/sx, although does so with a less emotional, pragmatic style. Soc/sp tends to be more overtly political, wanting to make decisions only which will benefit everyone and reflect diplomacy, and this can sometimes mean delaying or procrastinating on decision-making out of fear of stepping on someone's toes. On the other hand, sp/so can succumb to the sp-first problems of selfishness and, especially due to the inferior sx instinct, a preference for superficiality and officialdom. They can sometimes appear even more independent than sp/sx, due to their comfort around others, and how content they seem without giving much attention to the sx instinct, along with the aura of autonomy which comes with a leading sp instinct. Their devotion to organization and practicality can be truly astonishing. Their levelheadedness can be reassuring, and kinda makes up for the lack of a comforting sx.
Posted - 11 Nov 2010 : 8:36:47 PM
The sp/so people I've known like contributing to the group while maintaining their autonomy. My family is sp/so heavy. This stacking seems to have difficulty with 'sticky' (sx) issues. For example: when my dad was a young hippie pothead his parents (both sp/so) decided to send him to a mental institution rather than confront him about it. They wanted to fix the problem without getting their hands dirty. As a result a lot of stuff got buried, pushed to the side, pushed off onto a professional, superficially resolved, etc. For me, 'clean' is the word that comes to mind for sp/so stacking. They tend to be discreet, trustworthy and naturally private, socially aware but not really political. I think the sp/so operates pretty independently while always being distantly involved.
Posted - 18 May 2011
I was also wondering about sp and lighting in the environment. I (sp/sx) like my room as dark as possible and my twin brother (sp/so) likes his room as light as possible. He has, like, 10 lamps in his room. I think sp/so might want an airy environment (which would be sparse and clean) and sp/sx a heavy environment (dark and warm).
Posted - 19 May 2011
Yeah, that's a good observation; sp/soc wanting more functionality/space and sp/sx more warmth/closeness with the environment. sp/soc would probably be more focused on keeping everything organised and in it's place.
Posted - 19 May 2011
I (sp/sx) tend to decorate my furniture with clothing. (A mix of dirty and clean clothes.) The floor too. Perhaps I'm bringing warmth to cold hard surfaces.
I'll move to a different seat at a restaurant if there's a light shining too directly on the place I'm seated. Some restaurants have booths with a light hanging down over the table - if I'm with someone I'll use a napkin and start twisting the bulb to darken the place while asking simultaneously "Do you mind?". By the time they answer, the light is usually off and they don't want to go to the trouble of twisting it back in, themselves...so I've gotten my way.
Even in low lighting, when there's just a candle on the table, I'll usually set the salt & pepper shakers (or some other table paraphernalia) between me and the flame, to diffuse it a bit. An ideal setting would be a dimly-lit opium den, something like this or this.
Posted - 26 Aug 2011 : 9:37:27 PM
Sp/so irritability, like Larry David, has more of a "Don't you hate it when blah-blah-blah happens?" There's commiseration and wondering..."Is this weird?" It can be as outwardly volatile as sp/sx, but some portion of the vocal volume stems from having the morals of the norm backing you.
sx/so vs. so/sx
I think a difference here might be that so/sx has an easier time moving through an existing system or hierarchy; the so-instinct makes them naturally oriented toward the group's needs, and so, will be able to rise to a position of leadership within the group, while being able to secure support with quite a wide range of people. Many of those at the top of the group hierarchy will be willing to help someone with this stacking rise to the top, because they sense that this person is thinking with the group in mind, and those who are against this person would find it more difficult to unite against him or her. So/Sx can potentially have the widest appeal, and will be good at uniting a wider, existing group around them.
Someone who is Sx/So, though, will be oriented toward society to some degree; however, they will end up being more polarizing, since Sx-doms tend to evoke a "love it or hate it" kind of vibe. This stacking will not find unanimous support among those in charge of an existing hierarchy, because those who want to protect it will sense that this person does not act with the entire group in mind, while those who are more egoistic will dislike this variant's attractive energy, seeing it as challenging or threatening. Those who wish to rise to the top in any given hierarchy will probably have to rely on the strong support of a handful of powerful benefactors and mentors, if operating alone is not an option. However, this variant is very appealing to those who are marginalized and outside the existing hierarchy, because these people have fewer attachments to the status quo, and will find themselves drawn to the attractive energy that this variant will exude, oftentimes without their knowledge. Therefore, Sx/So can find themselves surrounded by a smaller group of people who remain fiercely devoted to that person. Smaller range, greater attraction.
If you're having trouble figuring out which one you are, take a good look at your relation to collectives; do you find yourself easily able to find common ground between different groups of people, and do you have an ability to enter a system and "speak with the voice of the people"? Or, do you find yourself entering a group, having tense relations with most of those at the top of the pole, and simply pulling those people you find interesting away from it, forming a similar-minded group of your own?
So/Sx is ecumenical. Sx/So is heretical.
so/sp vs. so/sx
so/sx - chaotic engagement
so/sp - dignified engagement
So/sp is slower-moving, more deliberate/measured/calculated, 'higher' without coming down, intellectually steadfast
So/sx is a 'faster' energy, less-planted, less-defined, mentally curious in a capricious way
Posted - 02 Aug 2009 : 02:40:35 AM
So/sx generally 'lacks sobriety', whereas so/sp has a drunkenness of words.... which makes for a certain flavor of ego-inflation. Think 'hot air' and the subsequent rise of the balloon.
sx/so vs. sx/sp
Both sexual types have a large energy, and tend to be pretty obtrusive in a social setting. The difference is that sx/so's have a smooth energy that flows outwards, while sx/sp's energy goes in bursts. In general, sx/sp's are more in their heads, thinking.. and will sit just thinking about the conversation, then suddenly feel a big burst of sharing come on, and burst in, sometimes at the wrong point, because they're not as attuned to the social dynamic.
When sx/sp's are in withdrawal mode, they're basically tuned out. This is why they can appear more like a self pres type. (...) If you look at them closely at such times, they'll appear to be elsewhere mentally. If you try talking to them, they'll display a reluctance to be drawn in. However, if something really catches their interest, they'll change dramatically and become like a regular sx/sp, all burst-y and jerky and excited. This is something I don't like about myself, one of my biggest faults that's been brought up by numerous people through the years. It's like I can't always get a feel for where to interject my thoughts in a group conversation, so I wind up blurting, and talking over people from all directions, even when I'm trying to gauge it. Sx/so's are very socially attuned and much smoother, regardless of e-type, than sx/sp's. Unlike the sx/so's smooth outward flow (sometimes likened to a generator), sx/sp energy moves in/out/in/out in unpredictable bursts (sometimes likened to lightening). That's one reason sx/sp's can angry others more than sx/so's.
sx/sp ~ seductive. romantic. the `affair`
sx/soc ~ aggressive. partier. the `porn star`
Posted - 13 Oct 2010 : 1:25:40 PM
Sx/sp is a personal mission to burrow/penetrate into the dirt of one's heart and soul (dirt = sp), and to be reciprocally penetrated by what one finds there. Picture the head pointed downward into the torso.
Sx/so is a heads-up position. The sx-energy here penetrates (and is penetrated by) 'the social'. And because of the transfigurative/metamorphic quality of sx, people of this stacking are potentially major catalysts for social change in the immediate era in which they live. The sx-electricity is directed outward, affecting the ionic charge of the atmosphere. As compared to sx/sp, where the electricity has a big grounding-wire routing back into the earth of the self.
Hence, with many of the major sx/sp figures in art/history/culture, though they may have some immediate effect on the people of their time, the bulk of their influence may not be felt for quite awhile, as it ferments and bubbles up, gas-like, over the course of decades and/or centuries - a slow trip from the heart of the earth.
Posted - 08-02-2012 : 02:47 AM
1. Freedom. Sx/Sp's believe in freedom. And they don't just believe in it as an abstract concept, but in reality. They don't want to be held down, confined, restricted, or contained. But then there's the problem of their siren, their drug, their love...an Sx/Sp would sell their soul to merge with their object of desire (be it a person, idea, or whatever). They will tirelessly fight off all other chains placed on them, but they will willingly don the handcuffs binding them to their love. The Sx/Sp ideal is to run away with their love and leave all the world behind. Sx/So's will not do this. Freedom is too precious to surrender, even to the object of their deepest affection. The Sx/So ideal is not to run away but to stand and fight, tearing down the walls and breaking all chains. Their siren, their drug, their love...this is the greatest chain of them all. They have a strong desire to merge and yet are compelled to at least put up a token resistance.
2. Means to an End. The Sx/Sp places their hopes for fulfillment of their primary instinct (and ultimately, their survival) in their personal qualities and attributes: attractiveness, charisma, skills, abilities, success, wealth, status, etc. When things don't work out, this can leave an Sx/Sp feeling self-conscious. This gives Sx/Sp's an aire of self absorption and, in some cases, fatalism. The Sx/So places these hopes in their cunning, cleverness, and ability to make the right choices and decisions. When things don't work out, an Sx/So may wonder what they could have done differently to have more success. This makes Sx/So's come off as enterprising masters of their own destiny.
Let's take seduction as an example: an Sx/Sp focuses on seeming desirable and attractive, an Sx/So focuses on saying the right things and acting the right way.
3. Romantic Relationships. Both Sexual types exhibit a push-and-pull dynamic. The Sx/Sp's version of this is the classic iteration: intense, passionate desire suddenly becomes too intense and Sx/Sp pulls away to protect themselves, only to have the desire return again. The Sx/So push-and-pull is an internal one: drawn in with some hesitation, drawn closer, maybe pull back a little, still drawn in. It doesn't look as extreme as the Sx/Sp dynamic because the Sx/So doesn't completely surrender to their desire.
As a result, an Sx/Sp is going to be more all-or-none in relationships, either on out on the sand or drowning in the depths...possibly bouncing back-and-forth between the two with the tides. An Sx/So will be more balanced and stable in their relationships, preferring to wade in the shallows. Additionally, an Sx/So has a much greater problem with partners that seem clingy or smothering. This is encroaches too greatly on their freedom. An Sx/Sp won't have a problem with this in itself (and may even like it); their greater concern is the desirability of their partner. Extreme closeness with a confident and secure partner is Sx/Sp heaven, with an insecure partner it's hell.
sx/so vs. sp/sx
Sp/sx is the most regressive stacking. It desires reentry, a return to the safety and comfort of the womb/God/Mother Earth (the earthiness of this stacking could be an unconscious attempt to become covered in Mother Earth). Sp/sx wants a retention of self-hood within a larger entity; it wants to belong. Sp/sx likes hiddenness and the underground; it is the least exposed stacking.
Sx/so is the most progressive stacking. It desires propulsion until dispersal/merging happens with mate/social group/God. Sx/so wants a loss of self-hood to a larger entity; it wants a merging. Sx/so likes to unearth, display and surrender; it is the most exposed stacking.
Both stackings can be dark and individualistic, and both want to belong/merge with something larger. The darkness of sp/sx is more environmental and secretive, and the darkness of sx/so is more philosophical. Both seem rather 9ish (sx/so merges, sp/sx desires comfort and sensuality) and 5ish (sx/so is radical, sp/sx is reclusive) but ultimately sx/so exists at the top of the E where it is exposed and sunny, and sp/sx exists at the bottom where it is segregated and shadowy.
There's been some talk about sp/sx and death and decay, but I think sp/sx really sees the dark underground as a nourishing womb and not death-like at all.
The more I think about sx/so, the more I see it as being primarily interested in merging. Its almost as if it wants to reach such extreme speeds that it flies apart and is dispersed across the cosmos.
The Crucifix symbolizes the sx/so surrender superbly. Jesus abandons his own shape/ego and (while lifted up off of the earth and in full view) takes on/melts into the shape of God/the cosmos (the cross is an ancient symbol for the cosmos).
Sx/so disdains the earth. The association of death and decay with sp/sx comes from the sx/so/Christian/modern view of the earth as sin-filled rather than good and life-giving (which is the primordial, sp/sx stance). Jesus rejected Mother Earth; he would only have a dirt free womb.
I see sx/sp (the sibling of sx/so and sp/sx) as being torn between the womb and the cross. It wants both, achieves neither, and so goes its tormented, orphaned existence (in light of this, the sp would be "irritating", as you feel the pull towards the cross, "but necessary", as you feel the pull towards the womb).
I think sp-lasters are closer to death (if that's even the right way to put it) than the rest of us. They lack a strong center. They're low gravity so they leave bits of themselves lying about. With so/sx it seems like this is accidental, but sx/so seems hell-bent on dispersal. I think this is the reason for their provocative natures and exhibitionism. It's as if they're saying, "Here I am. Rip me to shreds. Take a piece for yourself and one for your friend". So I suppose so/sx is "oblivious" and sx/so is "desirous".
Sp/Sx plunges into the depths of the earth while Sx/So shoots out into the stratosphere and beyond.
so/sp vs. sx/sp
The so/sp seems to undergo a lot of the same "self punishment" that the sx/sp when the sp blocks the sexual, but with a different feel to it. It's not like a dog running at a bird that landed nearby only to be jerked backwards by the chain around it's neck, but rather an acute awareness of others that pulls on them like they're being hooked into and pulling the dead weight of others. There's a sort of distancing from others that so/sp's engage in. My so/sp friend on another thread posted a quote that says something along the lines of "taking refuge in her composure" which i think captures the feel of the instinct. I think sexual moves outwards and gets yanked back, but the social doesn't really reach the same way and is instead "crushed" without that moving out effect taking place.
Posted - 16 Mar 2008
That's a good analogy. It's almost like the pulling happens before it even begins. I often feel myself pulling against my own desire to reach out. So, for example when I said hi to that guy at my gym and I got no response, it was a big blow to me because for me to even go outward at all is hugely uncomfortable. I hardly ever make that first move (exacerbated by the double withdrawn I'm sure) but the so/sp stacking allows for even less movement. Sometimes I feel bound by my own lack of outward energy. It's like wanting to speak very badly but not being able to make out the words. There's a need to maintain that "composure" because it feels very threatening to loose it, especially around others.
I think there's a bit more neuroticism in general with the so/sp 4s. There seems to sometimes be a stiff sort of uptight nervous bent about us that seems to put people off. I think having the self pres second in the stacking without the grounding of the sexual energy first it can be easy for us to sort of get all nervous and uptight (kind of like 6's in a way) because of the self monitoring and repression of emotional expression. It can come out in strange ways that can seem out of character like emotional outbursts that far outweigh the situation at hand, or reckless or outrageous behavior as a way of discharging excessive energy.
SO for me is not so much concerned with my "status" in society. I couldn't care less most days. However, there is a need to make yourself known in a way. To feel invisible is like being murdered for a social variant (unless it's self inflicted invisibility). Mine might be a bit worse so I can't speak for non withdrawn types, however, I think my concern is with making a contribution that can represent me in a way that I'm happy with.
three variants working together = high health levels
two variants working together = average health levels
focus on one instinct = unhealthy (fixation, neurosis, etc.)
second instinct - lowest anxiety
first and last instinct - higher anxiety
first instinct - can evaluate self, too much recognition
last instinct - cannot perform self-evaluation, under-recognition
first instinct - internalized, the self, understood in concrete and literal sense as applicable to one's being
second instinct - externalized, a flexible and creative area, how we relate to others
third instinct - outside of one's interest zone, unawareness/stress/dismissiveness
Sp-first - identify with being reclusive
Sx-first - identify with being emotionally intense
So-first - identify with being socially adaptive
Sp last - messy, scattered
So last - dirty, uncouth
Sx last - clean, parched
sp/so- bare and superficial
sx/sp- hardened and curled in
so/sx- soft and sparkly
sp/sx- heavy and contained
sx/so- ray of sunshine
so/sp- smooth with a crust
So/sp is concerned with the well-being of the collective
Sx/sp is concerned with the well-being of a close other
So/sx is concerned with the connections between different people/members of the collective
Sp/sx is concerned with the connection between the self and the environment
Sx/so is concerned with the clarity of connection between the self and the other
Sp/so is concerned with the clarity/cohesiveness/coherency of the environment
so/sx - warm, outward all-encompassing focus soaks gently inward
sx/so - giant energy flowing outward in a smooth, sparkily engaging manner, warm like so/sx, but with a more noticeably sexual energy in their communication
sp/sx - push the inward energy outward to communicate, but remain inwardly focused, always more focused in their own heads than on the other, analyzing the comments being made
sx/sp - total inward gives way to total outward in jerky bursts, usually directed at one person in particular, can't focus on the overall group, but may move rapidly from one total focus to the next
so/sp - warm outward focus retreats quickly inward when threatened
sp/so - firmly centered inwardly, expressing outwards, toward others, can give a feel almost like they're being gracious in expressing themselves to the crowd
so/sp, sp/sx - self-contained, quiet, reserved, insular, keeps to themselves
so/sp, sx/so - 'political'; focus is more 'out there' and of the world
sp/sx, sx/so - blunt/direct communication style, also a more fiery, 'wild', uncontrolled bent in some. (sp/sx can be insular, yet unrestrained and chaotic)
sp/soc - buried alive
sp/sx - poisoned
sx/sp - flamed alive from the inside out
sx/soc - struck by bolt of lightning/electrocuted
soc/sx - drowned
soc/sp – hypothermia
Posted - 14 Aug 2009 : 4:48:49 PM
On thing DFGray said that I thought was a really good way to think of the instincts is that sx is like blood, sp like earth, and social like air.
Sx/so is oxygenated blood, fast, fresh, energetic, pumping, sometimes squirting [you know what else squirts].
Sx/sp is blood that hasn't been oxygenated yet, probably thicker, that almost clotting darker thick blood, slower-moving.
Sp/sx would probably be earth teeming with underground roots, filled with blood.
Sp/so might be like earth with tunnels in it, and perhaps little creatures living in those tunnels... little hovels, maybe like an ant hill [i think of private or individual but society-minded sp/so's i know].
So/sp might then be desert mountains or something... might have too much earth in that image, but mountain-ness emphasizes the air and height... sparse maybe with Tibetan mountain shrine type things, with those flags blowing in the wind... where monasteries are. High, unreachable, places of wisdom.
So/sx might be like a more traditional mental image of a mountain, with rivers and trees and forest and animals... the height is there, but life, blood, is teeming everywhere, in all things, is 'making' the picture. blood is less shocking, more like when you have a great mountain climb and everyone's face is red and flushed. Energetic and invigorating, but not spurting like sx/so, more flowing.
Posted - 08 Jun 2011 : 12:40:11 AM
The soc-instinct seems to have some significant component related to tracking other people, as in:
- To observe or monitor the course of (aircraft, for example), as by radar.
- To observe the progress of; follow: tracking the company's performance daily.
But it's not about just keeping close tabs on someone or several people -- it has a sort of educational halo around it...wanting to set things in a clearly lit arrangement for a real or perceived group to take in and be illuminated by, in some way. It doesn't tolerate impressionistic interpretations very well. And isn't the kind of tracking that's for private consumption. It wants to serve and be distributed. I think it causes a good bit of confusion around and with soc-lasts who are largely oblivious of it as a style or don't really know what the purpose of it would be.
Posted - 08 Jun 2011 : 5:05:58 PM
I was speaking to a Social 6 last week, and he was describing himself as being a character in a video game, surrounded by other characters who march and follow their own path, but somehow the characters never really connect. It sounds like the tracking you're speaking of, as he is holding the video game and has the view from above.
There is also a clear sense of difficulty in effectively impacting others. Another Social, but this time a 5, was complaining to me last week that he was very comfortable socializing on a theme (let's say if he was going to a mixer on a specific topic) but had a real hard time connecting with people (women to be exact) if there was not a conversational backdrop to hang on to. I always thought that being social would be an advantage to connect with others, but clearly it isn't. It leaves the Socials just as frustrated as I have been, being introverted.
Posted - 21 Nov 2012 : 12:13:50 PM
My experience with the soc instinct - as emanating from non-soc-lasts - is there's an inadvertent/intrinsic 'health' impulse to it....which leads to certain kinds of expectations around helpfulness, etc. There may be as much of a healing impulse in sx/sp and sp/sx (as there is with soc), but it doesn't bring a 'group' with it. In other words, the healing space is just the two people (healer / patient), and mainly exists only in that moment, as opposed to calling in a larger/wider connection to history/precedent/social context. There's the sense, with the social instinct, that, in this space, there are more eyes on the issue than just those present in the room.
It's a style difference, and can easily be where incompatibility shows up between two people. Some want 'historical eyes' (and essentially always have those eyes walking with them). Some see that as unhelpful due to its lack of personal connection/intimacy, i.e.- that a given issue can't be approached and connected with unless the purely personal is the only thing being addressed, and protocol is an afterthought or only contributes intuitively.
Posted - 16 Mar 2008
SO for me is not so much concerned with my "status" in society. I couldn't care less most days. However, there is a need to make yourself known in a way. To feel invisible is like being murdered for a social variant (unless it's self inflicted invisibility). Mine might be a bit worse so I can't speak for non withdrawn types, however, I think my concern is with making a contribution that can represent me in a way that I'm happy with.
Posted - 30 Nov 2012 : 06:29:04 AM
SOC first - troubles: Over-adaptation: Can't tell when they're genuine. Over-participation: Won't leave me alone or recognize when a situation does not need their involvement. Over-communication: Too much checking-in, needing reassurance, testing bonds all the time.
SOC first - joys: Pays attention to me and adjusts to accommodate; invites me to come out and play when I think the world has abandoned me-- routinely remembers me; finds commonalities between us easily, making relations seem obvious.
Posted - 12-23-2012, 06:19 PM
(So-first) As for me personally, my deepest fear is being alone and/or being unknown to the world. That is what death means to me. I'm sort of debating between so/sx and sx/so (and this will probably take a bit of self-observation to really ferret out), but I do feel sp comes last for me. I don't find self-preservation to be a very salient aspect of my personal narrative.
When encountering a new group (work environment, neighborhood, class, etc.), these questions are often salient: Is this a social tribe that I am interested in? If so, what are its defining characteristics (slang, cultural elements, milieu, values, etc.)? Who seem to be the ringleaders, movers and shakers, and influential people here? Where do I see myself in this group? My insecurities growing up tended to telescope around being accepted (at the bare minimum) and and being respected/admired (ideally) as someone who is influential or valued to the group. Of course, because these point to shadow aspects, the more I've really taken a look at these motivations (shed light on them), the more they've tended to dissolve and become less important to me. "Groups", for example, dissolve into more amorphous things that really only exist in the conceptual realm. Nowadays, I'm better able to pinpoint specific individuals who are important to me.
On the intellectual front, I'm also interested in the social narrative: cultures and countercultures and the milieu of various groups and sub-groups within a population and what changes they made to the general structure around them. For instance, I really liked studying music through a social lens: the MOR 1950s types, then the hippies, then punk, then grunge, etc. as social phenomena. I'm not all that engaged in politics, admittedly. I've sort of burnt out on it, but I was pretty passionate and loved to debate it when I was in high school. But my explanation for why this changed would be indicative of the so-instinct, I think: I feel like there's a growing sense of political malaise/apathy resulting from the economy among young people.
Posted - 12-26-2012, 11:05 AM
Meh, I'm So-first but it took me a while to figure that out. When I first learned about the stackings, I assumed that I was So-last. I have historically exhibited some strong loner tendencies, and often times when less healthy I sit in a group of people and assume that none of the individuals have any depth. I realized that I was actually So-first for the following reasons:
1) I have a strong sense of social shame, which definitely leads to "hiding" from groups of people because I couldn't possibly imagine that they would like me. My inner dialogue is actually a tug of war between superiority and inferiority in relation to the group, with the group as a point of reference. I would say that, for much of my life, I have self-identified as being unlike many groups I come upon, and therefore don't make an effort to assimilate.
2) I realized that a lot of why I've been very depressed during certain phases of my life have had to do with not feeling like I had a community of like-minded people. For instance, I've wanted to be an "artist" for a long time, and have a group of people with which I could make art together, talk about our projects, support each other, etc. But the artists that were "high up in the social hierarchy" in college were of a prototype that I didn't fit into, so I felt very rejected, depressed, and inferior, yet at the same time I hated their standards as being pretentious, shallow, etc, and thought I was more of a "real artist" who would one day overturn them all. (painful to admit haha)
3) Sometimes in an uncomfortable group setting I can pretend to be anti-social for long periods of time, and act icy and detached but then become really nice and vulnerable and overly-friendly if someone reaches out to me in a way that I can relate to and trust (the pattern I've noticed is that this person usually can't be an SEE male, since they usually just seem horny to me LOL.)
Here are some ways in which So instinct manifests for me:
1) I most certainly get annoyed with groups whose values I don't agree with. I dream of creating a personal group of close friends who I can always have fun around, but also talk about all the deeper things I want to talk about.
2) I definitely exhibit "scattered energy." If I'm talking to person A I notice person B, who is sitting near by. Sometimes I'm talking to person A in order so that person B will hear what I am saying; what I am saying is not really for person A. Or maybe I see that person B is not in any conversation, I want to change the topic to be more interesting so that he/she can join in, but I try to do it more subtly by changing the topic of the conversation I'm having with person A. Either way, I usually realize what's going on around me.
3) Sometimes when I'm befriending people I think about all the other people they know and whether or not those are people I really want to hang out with too--if they are, it's almost like befriending more than one person, it's immensely valuable. Of course this is not the only or major reason I make friends, but it's definitely something that goes through my mind.
4) Social injustice on a micro-level (i.e. in communities that I am a member of, usually not by choice) really bothers me, and I spend a lot of time thinking about such things.
Sx-last (sp/so and so/sp)
Posted - 07 Mar 2009 : 9:41:53 PM
I can be very grateful when either surprised or receiving a gift, but it doesn't show in my reaction. This has given the wrong impression many times. Sometimes, I might really like something or enjoy it and my best friend will assume that I don't at all, just because I don't verbalize my feelings. I can be emotional, but consider it horrid to express in public. That would mean attention towards me and the thought that others might think I'm "crazy." I'd rather come across as sane as possible. Sometimes I have difficulty crying or expressing emotion during events that would normally cause others emotional turbulence.
Posted - 21 May 2012 : 11:19:31 PM
Do you prefer interacting in groups or in pairs?
They each serve different purposes, generally, for me. I appreciate the power of groups and what they can accomplish. For example, I was just at an all day meditation retreat and it was lovely to have all that group support and energy. For depth conversation, I like talking with just one person at a time. Threesomes can be good, also. More than that, I often get uncomfortable, because conversation has to accommodate everyone, and that often works against depth and openness, imo.
Posted - 25 May 2012 : 03:11:18 AM
Sp/soc's don't come across as distant to me irl. They are friendly, engaging, possibly amongst the easiest to engage in a casual conversation.
Posted - 22 May 2012 : 12:17:41 AM
SP/SO 4w5. 1:1 friendship or acquaintances is something I'm quite comfortable with (even though it took some time to be able to go and talk to strangers). The "cold" or "professional" or "distance" I often create, except with VERY close friends, is also a good marker of an SP/SO withdrawn. I see the SX last more as a difficulty to connect with the sexual energy and universe (anima, eroticism, juice, intense energy, desires, fantasies...) except in dreams. Intense intimate energy is easier to approach through art and creation. I'm not sure, but it seems related to a physical anxiety when I'm awake. Maybe it's the "automatic" repression of the SX dimension that is the source of this anxiety.
Posted - 20 Jun 2011 : 4:11:34 PM
'Social' is all around him [Larry David]. It's not something he reflexively disdains, like it is with Archie Bunker (sp/sx 6w7), for example. Larry fully expects that he's going to be in/at social gatherings/situations, whereas with Archie the assumption is that he's not going to attend. "Why would I ever wanna be around those people?!"
One of Larry's main themes is racial/ethnic faux pas's, or What's the worst most-'blasphemous' thing that could happen in this particular group scenario? Racial/ethnic = soc. It's different from Archie's racism though - Larry's thing is the pitfalls of navigating soc-realms from the perspective of some degree of conscientiousness/awareness of a given group's customs/traditions. Archie has no reflex to know a group well enough to make an 'informed' faux pas. His is instant prejudice and dismissiveness. Like swiping an arm across a chessboard, knocking all the pieces off, indiscriminately. Larry's monetary status, and how that plays out in social contexts, is another theme. He doesn't know how to do one-to-one (sx); all the two-person scenes include (or are focused on) conversation about a third party.
Soc-last (sp/sx and sx/sp)
Posted - 30 Nov 2012 : 06:29:04 AM
SOC last - troubles: Non-adaptation: Unconsciously fails to recognize me as a person, unless personally interested, with valid wants and needs that may need some catering to. Non-participation: Forgets to involve me in their life or forgets their involvement in mine. Non-communication: One-sided interactions, talking to themselves with me as a mirror.
SOC last - joys: More likely to be their true selves with me; less likely to place superfluous demands on my time and energy, outside short bursts; no need for petty small talk, we can cut right to the chase every time if we want or have parallel conversations without addressing every little point.
Posted - 07 Mar 2009 : 3:33:24 PM
What bugs me about social lasts is the "I don't care" quality they can bring to collective enterprises. They might appreciate the fact that these things exist and that they provide benefits, but there's a reluctance to participate in the creation and maintenance of such enterprises: serving on committees, boards, and the like that require research, sweat equity, and time commitment. Whereas I think that the gift of the social first is to be able to envision the benefits of collective effort, draw in people in ways that play to their strengths, put in place contexts or systems or communities. What's hard for social lasts is when they're asked to go along with the agendas of others and set aside their own interests for some common good.
Posted - 07 Mar 2009 : 8:44:10 PM
I think I have difficulty even perceiving groups as groups. There seems to be a blindness of even recognizing human cohesion beyond a very close inner circle. There's an assumption of not belonging, difficulty perceiving myself as part of the whole of humanity. The most difficult thing fundamentally is to care about joining or participating because there's something missing in my perception of being aware of it having any importance. It's not that I don't get it intellectually when my attention is brought to it, it's just that I don't feel it naturally. I've only recently become aware of this by noticing the difference in how socials think of a group I belong to - they'll say things like "I love our group" and I think: "what group?" It's not that literal, but can't think of a better way to describe it.
I don't really have trouble socializing - I rarely feel awkward and don't have a hard time making small talk. I think socials are more anxious around small talk because for them there's something at stake - they need to belong. I can enjoy a good party - it's just hard to care or to be really engaged unless I'm feeling a connection or know someone I want to be with. The hardest thing to come to terms with is to see how that lack of social awareness costs me - that if someone is not capturing my attention, they practically don't exist. In order to have authentic relationships with people, it really does take being able to not just tolerate but be present to people when the charge isn't there - to be able to be engaged without prerequisites.
Posted - 15 Jun 2011 : 3:06:32 PM
I view myself as a seperate entity, a seperate universe, which is very sp/sx and very very sp/sx triple withdrawn. But to me, my seperateness has always been, it's a given, and not something I notice until someone points it out to me. I have no idea what people think of me (nor do I wonder) unless someone tells me directly. A lot of times I'll be around people and I'll think "hey man, I'm doing really good, I'm fitting in" and then someone will say "you're weird and you stand out". So my seperateness is very obvious to other people (and kind of unnerving) but something that I'm oblivious to. When people tell me that I'm weird or whatever it hurts my feelings of course, but you can't feel ostracized from a group you were never a part of. I guess it just reminds me of my basic state of isolation and makes me despair of ever being accepted by someone. My outlook is horribly self-centered and solipsitic. I live in my own little bubble and people superficially touch me, and I only become other-oriented when someone penetrates my sp wall.
Posted - 21 Oct 2010 : 11:40:14 AM
I would make the distinction between not liking or not wanting to partake in particular socializing, to being anxious over it. I don't get anxious socializing because I don't care if someone doesn't like me. Being liked (or approved of) is not high up on my list of needs - but I will get nervous before an interview because it means something to me. That's the difference.
Posted - 08 Mar 2009 : 12:50:40 PM
I have what I call 'freedom neurosis', which includes several traits, but has a definite tie-in to soc-last stuff. I want to be able to leave any group setting at any time I want. Excuses are always at-the-ready and I usually only let someone know I'll be attending some social event, in the first place, by giving a caveat that there's some other thing coming up (that same day) that I'll probably need to be tending to - and that thing may just happen to pop up at any moment.
At a larger social gathering, I'll look for someone who wants to have a 'dark corner conversation' - and if I find that person, I have no motivation to see "what else is going on" with the others. My only style of being more truly sociable is as an 'entertainment monkey', where I spontaneously do something outlandish, or someone calls me up on-stage (so to speak) and says "dfg, do that thing you do." But I have to be asked multiple times, and the underlying motivation for 'performing' is in accentuating the separation between me and the group. "I'm the entertainer - you're the audience." Self-protective arrogance.
Posted - 08 Mar 2009 : 7:29:20 PM
I have a tendency not to say goodbye. When socializing and I had enough, I would just disappear and people would wonder where I took off to the next time I saw them. Part of the reason was that I didn't want them asking where I was off to or to explain to them how I get drained in social contexts. I keep it to the abstract in groups as well for the same reason of not wanting to talk about myself. I also maintain personal distance by presenting a social facade or mask. The facade is a little bit cool and formal (to maintain distance yet not be rude and antisocial).
Posted - 09 Mar 2009 : 4:46:06 PM
Being so last, people tend to think of me as ignoring the greater good for my small matters.
Posted - 12 Mar 2009 : 09:31:20 AM
Sp/sx - The times I've been put in leadership positions my immediate impulse is to 'break' the group, to stir it and smear it into disfunctionality - make it an absurdity.
Posted - 27 Oct 2010 : 10:12:54 AM
The soc-last feels baffled by the soc-first's compulsively diplomacy and group-orientation, yet cannot admit that it seems admirable. The soc-first has trouble understanding how the soc-last can seem so aloof and singular, yet sees that independence as something to emulate. People can sort of "complete" or at least compliment each other in that way, I believe.
Posted - 17 Mar 2009 : 2:25:26 PM
One thing I notice as a difference between my SP/SO husband and me as an SP/SX. When he takes a class at the university, he immediately networks with fellow students for the sole purpose of passing the class. I, on the other hand, have two modes: strangers or intimates. I can’t do the in-between acquaintance thing and if it’s for mutual benefit, it feels awkward. I’ve never been able to navigate that balance. So, I think my social last is my inability to define relationships and be okay with the fact that you don’t have to have deep meaningful connections with everyone, in fact, it’s very acceptable to sort people according to various contexts. This is how people succeed and get by in life. This is how life gets done. (Hence so many social first politicians). It’s a big weakness for me and it’s held me back.
I would agree that social first isn’t about being sociable. It can be about understanding the context of relationships between things. This can be about people, but also can be concepts. (Like seeing the interconnections and interdependencies between things within the larger context, having a broader focus if you well). So, if I had to summarize social first I’d say “awareness that things are defined by their context.”
Posted - 09 Oct 2010 : 10:57:04 PM
I agree mostly with Gray...and the flip-side of the rather sociopathic experience of easily turning one's back on others is the soc-last pleasure of actually getting along; kind of like -- "wow, didn't expect others to be so much fun, I wonder what it's going to cost me, though," mentality. Although honestly, I do think there is an element of "I don't need them anyway," -- at least for me. No, it's not forced, but genuine; sp/sx's really do need others less than the other subtypes -- or at least, that's the perception.
Posted - 10 Oct 2010 : 10:16:50 AM
(sp/sx) I can remember, as a child and into my teen years, whenever asked by a friend's parents to stay for dinner, it always made me pause and ask "Well, what's for dinner?". The thought was: This is kind of interesting and unusual that people seem to be showing interest in me, but will I actually like the food? I was 100%-barred from perceiving the invitation as a social gesture, which could've, in many cases, just been an act of politeness on the part of the inviter, given that it was dinnertime. I suppose any child/teen (of any stacking) might consistently make a similar social faux pas, but it was 20+ years later that it dawned on me what all those strange looks from parents were about (when they were asked what's for dinner).
Posted - 10 Oct 2010 : 1:34:00 PM
(sx/sp) I always seem to rub people the wrong way. Whether it's something I say or how I say it, or even just my demeanor, this lack of self-awareness has literally cost me a job. And it's not intentional, nor is it out of malice towards the people. But I'm just naturally inside my head much of the time, and am often slightly (albeit usually secretly) annoyed when people try to draw me out. During the not-infrequent chance I do take an interest in someone, I want to hang out with them all the time. This also doesn't usually end well, because the object of my affection often feels that I'm coming on way too strongly... I can think of at least 5 people who have told me this.
What are some ways that an individual's spirituality may manifest, given their primary instinct? For example, using god/divine in a broad sense:
Sexual: Union with the divine; ecstatic communion; possession, channeling, transformation. Merging with God. Mystics, dervishes.
Social: Collective consciousness; universal harmony; higher purpose (greater good). Cooperating with/serving God. Crusaders, enlighteners.
Self-preservation: Sacred spaces (holy ground); protective wards; purity versus contamination. Housing God (body as a temple), self-as-God. Ascetics, wardens, (healers?).
sp: arranging life in a way that provides a foundation for spiritual practice and supports what is real in you
sx: "flame", fire for truth/the beloved, "nothing will stop me from moving ahead" spiritually
soc: serving life, taking our place in the big plan. realization that "this isn't about me" - it's about what I give myself to / "we're all in this together"
Root Chakra (base of spine) = Self Preservation
Sacral Chakra (Sacrum) = Sexual
Solar Plexus Chakra (digestive systems) = Social
It seems that the higher chakras are more evolved (SP is lowest; SOC is the highest instinct)
+/- uses of stacking:
Posted - 13 May 2009
I saw several threads that this topic could be an aside to. I had dinner with Katherine and David Fauvre, and one of the more interesting things we talked about was a positive or negative identification with each instinct.
Everyone's familiar with the idea that there are two or more ways to relate to one's instinct - an SX-first can be very confident, pea-cocking, quick to approach another person, or they can be withdrawn from others, see themselves as ugly, long from a distance, be prudish, or totally hung up on any sense of intimacy or sex.
I'm negatively identified with my sexual instinct, positively with my self-pres, and I initially thought positively with my social, though more and more I'm thinking negatively. An archetype or image that has related strongly with me is that of Nosferatu in Warner Herzog's film. Nosferatu means "Insufferable one", he is a vampire and brings with him the plague when he travels to the German town, initially just to move there, but his quest switches to finding a certain woman. He comes to her in the night and begs her to "let [him] into their love" Anyway, the character strikes me deeply. I have always seen myself as this infested, hideous bringer of something awful, that loving someone will be their destruction, yet I still can't help myself. Approaching a girl I'm attracted to, even slightly, can be crushing for me. I assume they will be repulsed. As a counter-strategy, I try to be interesting because I can't be beautiful and alluring.
My SP is great. I take care of what I need and want no problem, though I could be healthier in my eating habits. My SO is probably negative - I usually go quiet in social groups and don't know how to relate to them, and am usually uncomfortable with groups.
Thus I think this sx-/sp+/so- configuration makes me a more typical sx/sp archetype of that conflict between wanting to hurl myself at someone and to hold back for self-protection. Shame around my attractiveness, both physical and internal, is a huge issue for me.
Posted - 15 May 2009
I don't see positive/negative identifications correlating to healthy/unhealthy. The thing that first came to mind for me about the +/- was superego messages - R/H use those symbols for positive/negative coercion when they teach the psychic structures. For me, strong +/- in SX - lots of positive feeling about making connection, doing anything that brings me in closer to someone or gives me a charge, doing anything to make myself more attractive, etc. Tons of negative feeling also about feeling unattractive and unloveable, when I fail in a relationship, hopelessness about connecting, anytime I feel I've lost my passion, etc. Complete preoccupation with whomever I'm most involved with, and that can be filled with positive or negative identifications depending on where the relationship stands. SP gives me milder messages. Most negative is about "should have done that" or "wish I didn't have to take care of that". Positive comes in sense of satisfaction from getting things done, chores completed.
Posted - 15 May 2009
SX for me is also characterized by +/- combinations; isolation versus engagement, intimacy versus independence, feeling either ecstatic and excited over a one-to-one relationship, repulsed, bored, or frustrated. Not hurt very often, but sometimes feel as if my true self is somehow being lost; fear of wasted time and energy given to a person who cannot be receptive, acknowledging and being assertive about needs for privacy, struggling with feeling intruded upon and yet open and relaxed around intimates, worrying about how much to reveal and share, who do I have time to give my attention to, what will be the cost? -- things like that.
SO is warmer and more deliberate, wanting to cooperate, feeling altruistic, but also sometimes becoming very irritated and indignant when others don't follow social or moral code; sarcasm, biting remarks, pettiness, and loathing often come out in the SO realm, and many times it seems that my actions are misunderstood in a social setting. Lately it has been a fairly harmonious relationship with the occasional hiccup: "Oh, I just can't stand that person, or this group of people, the way so-and-so said such-and-such thing, the topic of conversation, others' lifestyles, etc.
SP is almost entirely personal but sometimes comes at odds with the other two; it feels the most independent, and I realize that SP for me might be the area of greatest concern -- if I don't attend to it, I end up very neglectful, so lately I've been hyper-vigilant about health, expenditure, scheduling, practical matters; making sure I have my shit together. It feels like rationality; wanting to do things the right way, the responsible way, and to override SX and SO impulses or feelings of obligation. Certainly a grounding energy, but it can also become a source of fear at times. Sometimes it turns self-critical: Am I taking care of myself too much? Have I become selfish? A lot of analysis and rationally driven judgments in this realm (a dispassion compared to the passion of SX, or the commentary of SO).
Another note, comparing first instinct SX and last SP; SX comes out in the moment, always as intensity, and feels volatile, like riding a rollercoaster (to use a cliche), but the ride can quickly spin out of control and become very unpleasant. SP comes out in the past tense; regret about failing to see some logistical detail, not attending to a matter that was relatively simple, or feeling good about being responsible after time proves its importance. Following this pattern, SO for me, the second instinct, seems to happen largely in the future tense; interest over prospective social engagements, looking forward to big events, preparing for involvement with a larger group -- usually more neutral than the first and last instincts that seem to be relatively more polar in my reactions to them.
which instincts reinforces which enneagram types:
sx/so: 4w3, 7w6
sp/so: 1, 5w6
sp/sx: 5w4, 9
so/sx: 2w3, 7