How prevalent do you think each of the stackings are?

[FDG]

mmmm my retirement fund is so thick u will love it baby

[Suz]

Gah. You are impossible to talk to.

Why am i impossible to talk to? Just because you misinterpreted and are misrepresenting my words?

[yeves]

I'm sure you and Suz have passions and interests, but Suz wants a relationship with some guy who has a retirement fund and shit like that. Her priorities are on safety, security. There's a reason why sx/sp can battle with themselves between completely giving themselves over to something, and keeping at least one foot firm on the ground - sp is the grounding, the having a backup plan, the security aspect of something. Every single person has ALL the instincts. Everyone has sx, has sp, has so. These are drives that are present in everyone, the stacking is the priority you put on them.

It was Birdie who talked of retirement funds, not Suz, but moving beyond this point a few posts later another poster who types as sp/sx (FDG) tells her that he finds her list to be excruciatingly boring: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...=1#post1065312

My question to you is: why do you attribute this to sp-instinct when another sp/sx rebuffs it? Is it only because what Birdie has said supports what you believe but FDG's response doesn't, so you have choosen to ignore it?

Was trying to capture the energy of it and how it comes out in more than just relationships.

Apparently I failed.

And yeah, I've seen other stackings with hobbies they're really into and what-not. It's not what I meant to describe, and didn't communicate well.

Good communication flows both ways. When I browse these threads this is not the sense that I get from them. I feel like Suz and I are saying what needs to be said, but you aren't listening and are quick on dismissal.

Gah. You are impossible to talk to.

You will continue to fail to communicate for as long as it's this way.

[Narc]

mmmm my retirement fund is so thick u will love it baby

yr 401k is beautiful, FDG.

[golden]

Mm yeah, ppl are talking past one another here. Squark spoke about her own experiences for the most part, and that's not really a thing someone wants to debate about, when they've just revealed something of themselves.

Suz was misquoted, now that's clear. If this whole issue of instinctual variants weren't a bit fraught, I doubt there'd be a problem over something so minor.

There's nothing wrong with caring whether someone has a retirement account, i.e., signs of stability, but somehow it has been implied or concluded that there's something passionless in a person who considers stability important. And passion is a valenced idea. Having it is strong and exciting and cool, and not having it is bad and boring and lame.

And Squark said the opposite of that. She was deromanticizing Sx.

Lastly, I think it's better to say of an Sx last person that they will be cautious about whom and what they unleash their passion on. Not that they lack it. And everyone makes choices in that regard, it's just that the choices could be made differently, such as more quickly, the choices of a seeming instant. Still choices.

[Alomoes]

Whoop! Sp/So - self-effacing

[Galen]

nice constructive necrobump there