Instinct workshop notes sp,so,sx

[ashlesha]

Less intimate? Interesting, I'd like to hear more from your perspective on that.

the literature tends to talk about sx-firsts being so focused on bonding or whatever and it confused me when i compared it to actual people. because something i'd noticed is that sx-firsts can, to me, seem kinda - the word that comes to mind is slutty, but i don't mean that literally. i mean in their energy, or the feelers they put out for connection. like they'll find it anywhere and its not really as special. and what i read here coalesced with that impression, like its more of a selfish thing about their own feeling of intensity and resonance and not about actual bonding or realness. like they're more hungry for it so they'll just eat whatever is sitting around.
(well i'm aware that connecting is obviously an important aspect of sx but i'm emphasizing the difference i see for the sake of explaining)

it makes me think maybe sx-seconds are probably where its at for me re: comfort in relationships.

~ when sp is dominant, one-on-one relationships emphasize someone to nest with, build a castle with; long term relationships common due to focus on stability. sp is realistic about commitment, not going with every whim of feeling. the ability to look back and say "look at what we've built/created together" -- things are taken care of and now we can enjoy it; cozy. endurance in relationship builds love and trust

~ when we are tuned into the sx energy, we're more aware of the energy itself (e.g. the sense of arousal) than "the relationship" / a sense that the energy is pushing us into certain behaviors / sense of being compelled toward something (again, the flip side of this is revulsion, being compelled away from something)

~ broadcasting, charisma, display (pouring out the energy) / think of animals doing the dance/spread/strut to attract the other gender

[mfckr]

.

[Radio]

I think I appreciate comfort in my relationships too, but I find that there has to be something evolutory about the relationships I'm in. Like there has to be some sort of morphing in energy, meaning, significance, whatever in order for me to remain invested. Like once I get to a point where "well, this is it, this is what the thing is, tada" I just find it difficult to keep it that way and need something more.

I guess that's what kinda gets me about Sp-primary types, their relationships with people seem, at least on the surface, relatively simple and uncomplicated; or at least they tend to strive for simplicity in that way. It can almost seem like nothing more than cohabitation with the occasional "hey how you doing."

!!!! yussss

i was discussing this the other day with LSI sx/so friend how it's important for relationships to retain a constant sense of struggle; of fighting to win something; keeping that "spark" alive; because once you reach that leveled state of stagnancy (when you finally get it), you get bored and start looking for something else. he agreed w/ it, he has the tendency to do exactly that as do i myself. i never thought to correlate it with sx-first.

[ashlesha]

Interesting, I described a similar experience not long ago where I was so caught up in the energy of the moment that I didn't have time to really internalize how much I didn't give a shit about the other guy.

hahaha yeah. dsjfklasjlk;ajf. don't touch me if you don't mean it.

!!!! yussss

i was discussing this the other day with LSI sx/so friend how it's important for relationships to retain a constant sense of struggle; of fighting to win something; keeping that "spark" alive; because once you reach that leveled state of stagnancy (when you finally get it), you get bored and start looking for something else. he agreed w/ it, he has the tendency to do exactly that as do i myself. i never thought to correlate it with sx-first.

this concept isn't lost on me at all. but then what - manufacture a fight? play stupid games? are there any HONEST ways to achieve this?
do you ever give yourself time to have a celebratory victory party and actually enjoy it before kicking things off again?

[Galen]

this concept isn't lost on me at all. but then what - manufacture a fight? play stupid games? are there any HONEST ways to achieve this?
do you ever give yourself time to have a celebratory victory party and actually enjoy it before kicking things off again?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think he necessarily means that he needs tension within the relationship itself. I think so long as there's some sort of external struggle outside of either of you that you're both aiming to overcome, then you both will learn and grow together from the experience and the relationship will become that much more tight. I can't imagine needing to have fights within a relationship, that's just a set-up for disaster and unnecessary drama.

[mfckr]

.

[FDG]

I don’t know. I might expect that sort of thing to naturally arise, but if if was an explicit expectation that there be a constant struggle in the relationship, I’d get pissy and resentful towards the person for it.

Yeah, well, plus there's a lot of things that can make a relationship exciting rather than fighting: travelling together, new exciting activities, new places, making friends with new people, etc.