Aspects of sx/so

[Samson]

Your entire description of the happy hour event sounds incredibly Social to me. The way you introduce the event: position as teacher, "new" organization in an old school, summertime district reorganization, new principal who previously had been district admin, others were transfers, group of veterans,... etc
All this is Social talk: someone's place in the world as they are in relation to others.
Nothing in there describes Sx dominance to me, not even the accidental flirting. In fact, this is exactly So/Sx 's approach to the world. One-to-one in order to make the whole of the social happening more inclusive. Sx in service of So.

Also, you strike me as very sync-flow, for what it's worth. Not wanting to bore people, wanting to make the awkward person feel included... That's not contra-flow

Sync-flow Social seems about right to me: So/Sx

[Eliza Thomason]

Your entire description of the happy hour event sounds incredibly Social to me. The way you introduce the event: position as teacher, "new" organization in an old school, summertime district reorganization, new principal who previously had been district admin, others were transfers, group of veterans,... etc
All this is Social talk: someone's place in the world as they are in relation to others.
Nothing in there describes Sx dominance to me, not even the accidental flirting. In fact, this is exactly So/Sx 's approach to the world. One-to-one in order to make the whole of the social happening more inclusive. Sx in service of So.

Also, you strike me as very sync-flow, for what it's worth. Not wanting to bore people, wanting to make the awkward person feel included... That's not contra-flow

Sync-flow Social seems about right to me: So/Sx

Well the first post to a question is often the least-thought-out one so this is no exception. Please note I did not post it because I needed help trying to figure out what my type is. You don't know me and you don't know what I know of Enneagram. So to clarify: I am not asking random opinions of my type, but for commentary of the three different kinds of sx/so, which I posted. I bolded it, so you should be able to see its the focus of the post.

Are you so-last? Its hard for me to understand how you could miss that this was not any everyday social gathering, and that's why it merited explanation. Contrary to your conclusions about this one event, which was unusual and not typical, I will add some other explanations just in case you are a thinker and I am not wasting my time. I don't know. I have been to about 3 happy hours in my entire life. Its not something I normally do, as I would rather be home with my husband or visiting with one friend, enriching that friendship, rather than be at a social event. I get anxiety about upcoming social events, and I have to deal with it all week before it happens, like I am now for an event next weekend. They make me nervous, so I only go to ones I feel I need to go to in order to be true to my values, then I take time preparing my mind and self to eliminate as many possible areas of anxiety before the event. They always turn out fine, and always the anxiety beforehand seems to have been a waste, but it doesn't ever change the fact that I do not seek social events.

In the case of my story above, I was beginning a profession I spent countless time and money preparing for; its a time of a frightening monumental step into adulthood, and you don't want to do the wrong things, and when your new colleagues and your new boss are going out to happy hour and invited you, you con't say, "Naw, happy hours don't interest me.".. You go and do your best. However, @Samson, you seem to imply that sx/so's contraflow would be "- excluding, eliminating, separating, contradicting, subverting, reforming, rupturing" - even in this extreme situation, this social pressure for your work, would, if they felt nervous about socializing like I did would see that only, and be "contra", saying, "No thanks, new boss who extended the invitation, and, no thanks, new colleagues stopping at my door to make sure I am informed - "I am going to be separate and contradictory and eliminate myself from this unwanted event as I'm not feeling it." No, I do not think all sx/so would all be like this. I do not think we are slaves to our Socionics type or Enneagram stackings but instead normal people rise to the occasion, and do basically what's expected, particularly at key moments, even if we don't feel happy or competent about it.

So you don't know me and I would not ask your opinion til I had a sense that you did, or until I saw evidence that you know something of stackings, beyond the stereotypical quiz-result things, which I am too familiar with. I am looking for something beyond that.

@silke, I respect your thoughts on Socionics and Enneagram, so I wonder what you think of those three types of sx-first. Do you agree, that the popular perception of sx-first is of a "Fireside". Also, what do you think, in that 2nd link, of the quoted explanations of the three kinds of sp-first and the three kinds of so-first?? Also, can you tell me of a good online source for articles that goes into the different divisions of instinct stackings with more detail, like these?

Also further down that page is another explanation of sx-first types:
seducer - sx with no brakes
mystifier - sx with an emergency break
wanderer - sx with brakes

That "wanderer" really speaks to me - it seems like such an apt explanation of my life experience, something I have grown into over time - sx with brakes. Exactly. I have become increasingly like that over time as I try to match my values with who I am in the face of changing life circumstances. And the longer article I once read that I cannot find gives an even better explanation. None of the other stackings have a description that hits me as well as that "wanderer" one does, so, again, I feel that's me.

[Aylen]

Well the first post to a question is often the least-thought-out one so this is no exception. Please note I did not post it because I needed help trying to figure out what my type is. You don't know me and you don't know what I know of Enneagram. So to clarify: I am not asking random opinions of my type, but for commentary of the three different kinds of sx/so, which I posted. I bolded it, so you should be able to see its the focus of the post.

Are you so-last? Its hard for me to understand how you could miss that this was not any everyday social gathering, and that's why it merited explanation. Contrary to your conclusions about this one event, which was unusual and not typical, I will add some other explanations just in case you are a thinker and I am not wasting my time. I don't know. I have been to about 3 happy hours in my entire life. Its not something I normally do, as I would rather be home with my husband or visiting with one friend, enriching that friendship, rather than be at a social event. I get anxiety about upcoming social events, and I have to deal with it all week before it happens, like I am now for an event next weekend. They make me nervous, so I only go to ones I feel I need to go to in order to be true to my values, then I take time preparing my mind and self to eliminate as many possible areas of anxiety before the event. They always turn out fine, and always the anxiety beforehand seems to have been a waste, but it doesn't ever change the fact that I do not seek social events. In the case of my story above, I was beginning a profession I spent countless time and money preparing for; its a time a frightening monumental step into adulthood, and you don't want to do the wrong things, and when your new colleagues and your boss are going out to happy hour, you con't say, "Naw, happy hours don't interest me.".. You go and do your best.

So, which of the three are you?? Probably you are Firesside, and you fit sx-first perfect, so you don't bother to learn about the other kinds of Sx-first, instead just say "you are not in my group". I get it, but I think you are taking a shallow approach. Otherwise, you could give me an intelligent viewpoint of what is the difference between a coolside sx-first and, I don't know, maybe a darkside so/sx? That would be a be worthwhile to consider, vs. what you said about me when you don't even know me. I would not ask your opinion til I had a sense that you did, or until I saw evidence that you know something of stackings, beyond the stereotypical quiz-result things, which I am too familiar with. I am looking for something beyond that.
@silke, I respect your thoughts on Socionics and Enneagram, so I wonder what you think of those three types of sx-first. Do you agree, that the popular perception of sx-first is of a "Fireside". Also, what do you think, in that 2nd link, of the quoted explanations of the three kinds of sp-first and the three kinds of so-first?? Also, can you tell me of a good online source for articles that goes into the different divisions of instinct stackings with more detail, like these?

Also further down that page is another explanation of sx-first types:
seducer - sx with no brakes
mystifier - sx with an emergency break
wanderer - sx with brakes

That "wanderer" really speaks to me - it seems like such an apt explanation of my life experience - sx with brakes. Exactly. I have become increasingly like that over time as I try to match my values with who I am in the face of changing life circumstances. And the longer article I once read that I cannot find gives an even better explanation. None of the other stackings have a description that hits me as well as that "wanderer" one does, so, again, I feel that's me.

You do seem syn-flow>contra flow.

From another angle, the stackings can be seen aligning into two groups, each group moving in reverse direction to the other, which is an indicator to look for some underlying opposite compulsive thrust between them. Briefly stated, from the perspective of human inter-relations, they seem to be as follows:

Flow #1: sp/so —> so/sx —> sx/sp :: Compelled toward people/participation/involvement
Flow #2: sp/sx —> sx/so —> so/sp :: Compelled against and/or solipsistically away from people

The usual disclaimers apply…
a) A given person’s Enneagram type will modify and integrate with these expressions — potentially altering these themes significantly — as will personal history and current psychological state
b) The descriptions of the characteristics of these flows won’t translate into simple literalizations of behaviors; the discussion of these opposite directions is to get at a quality of the substrate material from which these flows and their respective stackings are formed

Integrating these directionalities with the Bhavacakra associations, the magnetic alignment of Flow #1 can, again, be seen turning toward others…as their earthbound collectivist themes convey: ‘animals’, ‘humans’ and ‘hungry ghosts’…in contrast to Flow #2, the non-human non-terrestrials: ‘gods’, ‘titans’ and ‘Hell’.

Flow #1
sp/so (animals) = practical cooperation ~ revering the work of the harvest, the beasts of the field, the ‘fat of the land’
so/sx (humans) = multifaceted/multidirectional attraction ~ the radiant festival of the four corners of the Earth
sx/sp (hungry ghosts) = urgent bonding / ‘unfortunate’ belonging ~ the perpetually orthogonal embrace of the seeker/searcher
Deeply human, compelled toward the process of humanity. Involved.

Flow #2
sx/so (gods) = cultural revolutionary ~ attractive social catalyst, steering popular culture/the arts/the cultural zeitgeist in a new direction using potent new creative forms
so/sp (titans) = culture warrior ~ social change by force and/or eternal higher principle, the booming thundering ‘voice of God’, the loftiest educators and highest clerics
sp/sx (Hell) = acultural solipsism ~ counterculture original, underbelly exposure, smoldering mysterian, the fermenting underground, cool & detached
Outliers, antisocial, energetically autonomous, chemically provocative, reverse-flow change catalysts. On some level, successfully rejecting the human condition…their own and that of others. Priest-gods of their own cult and eco-system.

sx/sp

Quote
'yin mode of seducing' is actually a bit redundant, but is meant to emphasize the receptive nature of sx/sp even at the overtly sexual range.

example, say a marilyn monroe who is perceived as hypersexualized, yet was fairly passive in a seductive style or 'yin mode' of drawing a pursuer rather than doing the pursuing. a sx/so would tend to act in the yang or pursuing role. same game but different roles.

the tractor beam of the seducer is like an event horizon, few can ignore their pull. the sx/so counterpart is the fireside range, a blazing yang which is sharply polarizing in its attracting/repulsing effect. like a test to reveal its true mates, the sx/so fire burns the wood and spares the gold.

seducer - sx with no brakes
mystifier - sx with an emergency break
wanderer - sx with brakes

sx/sp seducer (weak sp) - sx in full command produces an active recruiter of potential mates; but being sx/sp this remains in the yin mode of seducing. charismatic and overtly sexualized, arguably the most purely sx of all stacks and ranges. draws from so/sx shadow to liven up sx into an erotic playfulness and to keep sx far ahead of their relatively nominal sp. an emotional yearning to their mating ritual; an inherently unstable range that can lead to a pattern of serial heartbreak. often confused for sx/so.

sx/sp mystifier (midrange) - the range where the mystique of the sx/sp stack is at its strongest. unconsciously attracts with intense eye contact and other sx feelers, but holds back enough to give them a kind of untouchable or hard to get close to quality. depending on their true intentions this can either frustrate their sx or reward their functional sp cooling system. like midrangers of all stacks, there's a seemingly casual approach to meeting their variant needs as the secondary instinct is kept both in play and at bay, and others may wonder what they really want.

sx/sp wanderer (strong sp) - the most clasically 'blocked' of the sx's, often exchanging intimacy in favor of the more immediate pleasures of the body. paradoxically the most wandering and restless of the sx/sp's. pulls from sp/so to ensure the sx flood is contained by the sp levee, which can provide a sense of stability at the expense of seeming put off by others. sex can mean a hollow satisfying of the instinct while more vulnerable feelings are suspended. quietly charged but muted, and can seem self pres first.

Are you considering sx/sp now as a "wanderer"? I know from your posts and things you shared why you type sx first. I don't remember your core enneagram type. What is your tritype?

[Eliza Thomason]

You do seem syn-flow>contra flow.

I do like to get along. But I have a lot of "contra" within that I withhold, a lot of the time. I am always telling myself, "your view is not what matters here." Which contradicts my desire to express it! Because I have a view, often contradictory. I will focus on respecting what a person says/does/believes in because the higher value is that of seeing and validating the goodness of a person, and that "holds back" the lesser value of my expressing contradictory views, particularly when they are not sought.

[FONT=Arial]
Are you considering sx/sp now as a "wanderer"? I know from your posts and things you shared why you type sx first. I don't remember your core enneagram type. What is your tritype?]

No! Not sp first. When I have done stacking tests it is consistently sx/so/sp though close, not a big lean. And the descriptions fit. I am iw2. For a long time I thought I was 2w1, but on closer examination I am convinced I am a 1 not a two. But no doubt the wing is 2. This is true on 1 vs.2:

1 vs 2: Ones are much harder on themselves than twos. Twos can think highly of themselves merely by seeing themselves as considerate of others. Even when twos are self-critical, they have more of a pride in being self-critical. Twos being image-center first won't hesitate to have outbursts of emotion, which seems like a lack of self-control to the one.

and this is true about 1w2:

1w2s in contrast sees the 1w9 focus as too detached from humanity and have a more practical morality focus, for example things between people like ethics and etiquette. The 1w2's focus on where to fix things is more in the trenches due to their 2 wing. They value connections between others above abstract ideals in terms of application of principles.

Yes, I can see now that I misread that - it apparently applied to sp first, but yet, that's how I am. A lot of brakes on. Partly due maybe to E-I, wanting to do it right. Not wanting to hurt people and step on toes, either. (when I do I honestly feel I am hurting Jesus). Wanting to live to my principles and awareness that that is all above me (the things I know to be right and good)..

I am not much fluent in Enneagram, though I have read a lot of books on it some time back, and have done a bunch of reading online. Its not my favorite. I prefer Socionics. However the things that I have read and studied in Enneagram I do feel I "get".

I will let you know when I find that tri-type. At the time I figured it, it really did fit with what as written on that tri-type. Sort of curious now.

P.S. I am so sp-last... I am supposed to be paying bills today, which are late, and the day is seriously slipping by..
P.P.S. If you send me a link to a reliable tri-type test or two I may take it again. (Then I can compare it to what I scored before, if I find it)..

[Aylen]

I do like to get along. But I have a lot of "contra" within that I withhold, a lot of the time. I am always telling myself, "your view is not what matters here." Which contradicts my desire to express it! Because I have a view, often contradictory. I will focus on respecting what a person says/does/believes in because the higher value is that of seeing and validating the goodness of a person, and that "holds back" the lesser value of my expressing contradictory views, particularly when they are not sought.


No! Not sp first. When I have done stacking tests it is consistently sx/so/sp though close, not a big lean. And the descriptions fit. I am iw2. For a long time I thought I was 2w1, but on closer examination I am convinced I am a 1 not a two. But no doubt the wing is 2. This is true on 1 vs.2:

1 vs 2: Ones are much harder on themselves than twos. Twos can think highly of themselves merely by seeing themselves as considerate of others. Even when twos are self-critical, they have more of a pride in being self-critical. Twos being image-center first won't hesitate to have outbursts of emotion, which seems like a lack of self-control to the one.

and this is true about 1w2:

1w2s in contrast sees the 1w9 focus as too detached from humanity and have a more practical morality focus, for example things between people like ethics and etiquette. The 1w2's focus on where to fix things is more in the trenches due to their 2 wing. They value connections between others above abstract ideals in terms of application of principles.

Yes, I can see now that I misread that - it apparently applied to sp first, but yet, that's how I am. A lot of brakes on. Partly due maybe to E-I, wanting to do it right. Not wanting to hurt people and step on toes, either. (when I do I honestly feel I am hurting Jesus). Wanting to live to my principles and awareness that that is all above me (the things I know to be right and good)..

I am not much fluent in Enneagram, though I have read a lot of books on it some time back, and have done a bunch of reading online. Its not my favorite. I prefer Socionics. However the things that I have read and studied in Enneagram I do feel I "get".

I will let you know when I find that tri-type. At the time I figured it, it really did fit with what as written on that tri-type. Sort of curious now.

P.S. I am so sp-last... I am supposed to be paying bills today, which are late, and the day is seriously slipping by..
P.P.S. If you send me a link to a reliable tri-type test or two I may take it again. (Then I can compare it to what I scored before, if I find it)..

Ok, I was unsure if you were considering sx/sp because you related to the "wanderer".

Sexual/Social


The instinctual energy of this subtype is the most at odds with their dominant Oneness. This subtype is the most intense. They are looking for perfection in everyone they are close to, not just their spouses. They can be very charismatic and engaging. They can also be very persuasive, like the social/sexual. If they have an opinion you are going to hear about it. It’s very important for them to be understood. They are outwardly competitive. Like the social/sexual, they too may be mistyped as other enneatypes. The anger that is under the surface with the other instinctual variants of type One is much more likely to be apparent with this subtype. You always know where you stand with them. They can mimic type Eight’s energy in this regard. On the high side, this type is warm and engaging, but on the down side this same energy can bring with it the full brunt of the One’s anger and the need to be right.

https://oceanmoonshine9.wordpress.com/one-stacks/

[Eliza Thomason]

Ok, I was unsure if you were considering sx/sp because you related to the "wanderer".

Sexual/Social


The instinctual energy of this subtype is the most at odds with their dominant Oneness. This subtype is the most intense. They are looking for perfection in everyone they are close to, not just their spouses. They can be very charismatic and engaging. They can also be very persuasive, like the social/sexual. If they have an opinion you are going to hear about it. It’s very important for them to be understood. They are outwardly competitive. Like the social/sexual, they too may be mistyped as other enneatypes. The anger that is under the surface with the other instinctual variants of type One is much more likely to be apparent with this subtype. You always know where you stand with them. They can mimic type Eight’s energy in this regard. On the high side, this type is warm and engaging, but on the down side this same energy can bring with it the full brunt of the One’s anger and the need to be right.

https://oceanmoonshine9.wordpress.com/one-stacks/

Hmm, not really a shoe-in. Some yes, but some no. Here is a plus and minus:

- It takes a rare crisis and circumstance for me to resemble an 8. (Maybe I should read 8 again, but I think not)
+ I can be intense when I am onto a thing
? Perfection in self and those close to - yes, but, I feel its wrong/imperfect to micromanage, and I am aware that unsolicited advice and criticism can wound, and when I do that I feel I wound Jesus himself. However, if I can steer unseen, I do. And my most common method of that is prayer. I pray very specifically for what I think is right for people that I know, always acknowledging that God knows best and my hopes for a person's best may be completely misplaced.
+ if I am on the outs with a person I feel obligated to let them know where they stand, and I am strong that the right person to tell is that person and not someone else.
+ I can be very persuasive when I am convinced of the rightness of a thing.
- I keep a lot of opinions to myself unless its a very firm one, or it might involve harm to others - then I don't care if you don't want to hear it.
+ Its is very important for me to be understood. (Also its important for me to understand you correctly)
- I tend to turn away from competition, especially social competition
+ E-1 anger I have seen in my life as begin depression - anger turned inward. However, there has been little of either. I flare up at unfairness and unkindness.
+ warm and engaging - generally yes
? anger, still don't know, and "need to be right" - - I feel I need that for myself and I don't bother making a case of that to whom I think is wrong. I think: "misguided" and I pray for them - and I feel a responsibility to do that because I know God answers prayer and I think He expects me to pray for those He put in my life, even if only in the fringes of it.

Thanks for this description. I would be interested to see how it "stacks up" to other authors. I will continue assuming I just don't understand Enneagram enough, before I conclude it doesn't stack up...

Do you have any thoughts or links to articles on stacking variances?

[Aylen]

Hmm, not really a shoe-in. Some yes, but some no. Here is a plus and minus:

- It takes a rare crisis and circumstance for me to resemble an 8. (Maybe I should read 8 again, but I think not)
+ I can be intense when I am onto a thing
? Perfection in self and those close to - yes, but, I feel its wrong/imperfect to micromanage, and I am aware that unsolicited advice and criticism can wound, and when I do that I feel I wound Jesus himself. However, if I can steer unseen, I do. And my most common method of that is prayer. I pray very specifically for what I think is right for people that I know, always acknowledging that God knows best and my hopes for a person's best may be completely misplaced.
+ if I am on the outs with a person I feel obligated to let them know where they stand, and I am strong that the right person to tell is that person and not someone else.
+ I can be very persuasive when I am convinced of the rightness of a thing.
- I keep a lot of opinions to myself unless its a very firm one, or it might involve harm to others - then I don't care if you don't want to hear it.
+ Its is very important for me to be understood. (Also its important for me to understand you correctly)
- I tend to turn away from competition, especially social competition
+ E-1 anger I have seen in my life as begin depression - anger turned inward. However, there has been little of either. I flare up at unfairness and unkindness.
+ warm and engaging - generally yes
? anger, still don't know, and "need to be right" - - I feel I need that for myself and I don't bother making a case of that to whom I think is wrong. I think: "misguided" and I pray for them - and I feel a responsibility to do that because I know God answers prayer and I think He expects me to pray for those He put in my life, even if only in the fringes of it.

Thanks for this description. I would be interested to see how it "stacks up" to other authors. I will continue assuming I just don't understand Enneagram enough, before I conclude it doesn't stack up...

Do you have any thoughts or links to articles on stacking variances?

It depends on the core type. I have some excerpts from various books and sites that give some insight into sx/so but you have to look at the sx/so in relation to E1 since that will be more in alignment with your instincts than sx/so with different core types. An sx/so 4 is not going to resonate with you as much. Of course a sx/so 7 (like Kim) is going to be different than an sx/so 1.

Perhaps, Fireside, Flirter, Coolside has more to do with with the expression of the core type plus emotional/psychological make up more than anything else. . Sx/so is probably the type other people have the strongest reactions to, as far as repulsion/attraction, whether they are Fi valuers or not. Think Madonna. They are generally very passionate about any causes they champion but it is the most exhibisionnistic of all the stackings, no matter the core type. They are not easily ignored.

sx/so

This is the type that exudes the most raw charisma and sexual energy. They may identify so strongly with whatever they’re involved with that they often become the symbol of its core essence, and sometimes its lead agent for change. Hardly content with the status quo, this subvariant seeks to alter the fundamental structure of something while at once embodying it’s purest or most extreme form. Possibly attracted to radical views on politics, philosophy, spirituality or creativity that reflect their penchant for testing boundaries. They enjoy pushing other’s buttons, especially those resistant to their modes of expression. It’s not uncommon for them to have a pet social, political or spiritual cause which they’re able to support with heartfelt conviction. May exploit and seek to redefine sexuality to reflect their own colorful and uncertain understanding of it. While prone to exhibitionism, they are strongly attracted to grounding influences which can anchor them and provide stability. Failure to satisfy an especially intense desire for connection may cause this subvariant to spite others at the risk of jeopardizing the need for an equal, stabilizing force. Can feel pulled between wanting a life of maximum intensity and reassuring episodes of peaceful convention.
Motivation: to impact others, question assumptions, challenge convention.


Familiar roles: provocateur, activist, exhibitionish

THE SEXUAL OR ONE-TO-ONE SUBTYPES

• One - Evangelist - over-zealous or jealous.
• Two - Lover - using seduction or aggression to gain attention.
• Three - Movie Star - having the best masculine or feminine image.
• Four - Drama Queen or King - beating the competition through power or style.
• Five - Secret Agent - keeping things confidential.
• Six - Warrior - overcoming fear through maintaining strength or creating beauty.
• Seven - Salesman/woman - fascination and suggestibility with ideas, people,and products.
• Eight - Dictator - the drive for possession and maybe surrender.
• Nine - Seeker - sexual or spiritual union and the urge to merge.

THE SOCIAL SUBTYPES

• One - Social Registrar - socially correct but non-adaptable.
• Two - Ambassador - seeking recognition thru ambition.
• Three - Politician - achieving social success and prestige.
• Four - Critical Commentator - overcoming social shame.
• Five - Professor - social symbols and systems.
• Six - Social Guardian - doing one's duty.
• Seven - Utopian Visionary - limitations and making sacrifices for the cause.
• Eight - Group Leader - fiercely committed to friends and social causes.
• Nine - Community Benefactor - strengths and problems with participation.

1s generally: SX are the reformers, minding others' business, perfecting others. SO are perfect already. SP worries too much. Problem of morality vs. moralism

SX-1 - An animal in heat. Anger infuses desire. "I have to have it and I have a right to it." Example: diamond mines in Africa - feeling that "I did the work to get the diamonds and what would the Africans use them for anyhow? They don't know what to do with diamonds, they don't appreciate them." The conquistador. I have a right to what is wanted. No shame in wanting what's not appropriate - asks "Why Not???" in response to questions of appropriateness. Rhinoceros of a person

SO-1 - Unadaptable. Rigid, school teacher mentality. "I'm going to tell you how it is." Aristocratic. My way is right; others must adapt to me. Tendency to adhere to a particular way of doing things, like a scholar who is such in every sense of the word, but hangs on to a bad accent and grammar from his or her home country and refuses to adapt to new environment. The model. The one that already knows and doesn't need to learn from others. NN for superiority. Make others wrong to have power over them.

SP-1 - Passion for worrying. Not just behavioral - there's a need to worry. Need to know how it's going to happen. Fusses over details. Must have everything taken care of.

Here is a description of an sx first 1 and I am including the description of a social 1 too since the "coolside" is said to have strong sx and so.

The Sexual One: “Zeal” (Countertype)

While the Self-Preservation One is a perfectionist, and the Social One unconsciously takes on the pose of someone who is “perfect” in modeling to the right way to be, Sexual Ones focus on perfecting others. This One is more of a reformer than a perfectionist. They have a need to improve others, but don’t focus on being perfect themselves.

This is the only One subtype that is explicitly angry and so is the countertype of the three One personalities. The Sexual One is impatient, can be invasive, goes for what he or she wants, and has a sense of entitlement. These Ones have an intensity of desire fueled by anger that motivates them to want to improve others. This can be expressed as a sense of excitement, passion, or idealism about the way things could be if people would reform their behavior, or if the reforms they envision were enacted by society. This makes them compelling and vehement.

This character feels entitled in the sense of possessing the mentality of a reformer or a zealot—one who knows how to live or do things better and so feels a right to assert their will over others. Like the mentality of a conqueror, this approach can be rationalized (and made virtuous) through the rhetoric of their adherence to a higher moral code or calling.

According to Naranjo, Ichazo gave this subtype the name, “Zeal,” meaning “a special intensity of desire.” Zeal suggests an intensity or excitement that fuels the desire to connect with others. It also means doing things with care, dedication, and fervor.

This One’s anger infuses his desire with a special intensity or urgency and the person has the sense that “I have to have it,” or “I have a right to it,” or “I have to improve it (society or another person) to make it the way I know it should be.”

In a collective sense, this can be seen in the idea of “manifest destiny,” the ideology that justified the takeover of the western part of the United States from the Native Americans in the 1800s. Despite what our retrospective view of that period might be, this philosophy was a justification for the white man taking over land populated by “savages.” Another example of this ideology can be seen in the minds of conquerors, as when the Spanish conquered South America. The rhetoric displayed there was, “I can take this because I’m noble and civilized.”

In the Sexual One, this intensity of desire can support the impulse to reform or perfect specific others or to make the world a better place in the way this One believes it should be. Sometimes, this desire to perfect others grows out of a genuine belief in an enlightened vision of reform or idealism. However, it may at the same time be fueled by this instinctual subtype’s need to make others more perfect. One woman I know with this subtype reported that she felt she would be justified in leaving her husband if he did not carry out her suggestions for his improvement. And she felt a need to help him become a better person so she could have a better partner.

In Western culture there can be an anti-sexual or anti-instinctual sentiment—the idea that it’s not okay to act on one’s desires. For instance, the sinfulness of sex is so pervasive that it can be hard sometimes not to feel improper or naughty if we allow ourselves to freely express our sexual desires. But the Sexual One has a different, more liberated, attitude with regard to sexual desire. There’s a kind of “go for it” mentality that can then necessitate the finding of good reasons to support the rightness of whatever the Sexual One wants to do. Unlike the Self-Preservation Ones, these Ones don’t question themselves as much. Instead they are concerned more with making others into the people they think they should be.

These Ones are avengers; they are not afraid of confrontation. They may be containing a murderous rage that they cannot see. Their anger can be like a volcano that erupts. They perceive themselves as strong. They have great strength and determination and can be very brave. They are also impulsive and do things quickly.

Sexual Ones have two sides: a more playful side oriented toward pleasure and an aggressive, angry side. Pain is the emotion they repress the most and the one they find most difficult to show. They may act out their unacknowledged pain by leading a double life as a way of breaking the rules. Some Sexual Ones display “trap-door” behavior, discharging their anger and pain through “bad” acts. An example of this is Eliot Spitzer. As the Attorney General of the State of New York, he crusaded against lawbreakers, going after Wall Street criminals and prostitutes in an effort to reform society. However, he later resigned as the Governor when he was caught having an ongoing relationship with a prostitute himself.

In light of this type of behavior, this One can look like a type Eight. Like Eights, they can be energetic, assertive, and strong. These Ones believe they have a right to impose their vision and get what they need, in the same way an Eight might overpower or dominate a situation to impose their own will. But Eights and Ones differ in that Ones are “over-social” and Eights are “under-social.”

Sexual Ones bring intensity and energy to relationships. They can be forceful and insistent. They may attempt to reform their partners and friends, conveying the sense of being on a mission or drawing on a higher calling or authority in the things they do. They excel at pointing out what others might need to do to reform their behavior or meet specific standards, but focus less interest and attention in reforming their own behavior, seeing what they do as right.

Sally, a Sexual One, speaks:

I have a strong need for order in my relationships. This order is determined by my moral code of conduct, which holds my internal world together. When this is disrupted (which is quite often) I can be edgy, critical, demanding, and insensitive. I have often been unaware of how I wanted to (and tried to) fix or improve others. It just seems so right to bring order through clear communication and the sharing of insights.

I can be very jealous when others seem to enjoy closer connections than I do. And I am more than alert to my partner’s placement of attention, especially on another woman! My intensity often surprises me! And I see now how challenging it can be for those around me.

The Social One: “Non-Adaptability”


The Social One is less of a perfectionist and focuses more on being the perfect example for others of the right way to be. This One is not an internally anxious person striving to be perfectionistic, but rather a paragon of correct conduct. Social Ones have a need to represent the perfect model of the way to be or do things through their actions—to teach others by example. Ichazo labeled this type “Non-adaptability” and Naranjo calls this subtype “Rigidity,” describing the Social One as having a kind of “school teacher” mentality. Non-adaptability or rigidity refers to the tendency of this character to rigidly adhere to particular ways of being and doing things, as a way of expressing exclusive ownership of the “right” way to be, think, and behave.

In this Social One subtype, anger is half-hidden. Where the heat of anger changes into warmth in the Self-Preservation One, in this personality there is a transformation of the heat of anger into cold. This character tends to be a cooler, more intellectual type, in which the main characteristic is control. However, the anger of the Social One is not completely repressed, because there is an equivalent of anger in their passion for being the owner of the truth. In this subtype, anger gets channeled into an overconfidence about being right or “perfect.”

The Social One has a (usually unconscious) need to feel superior or to appear superior (because a conscious desire to be superior would constitute bad behavior). It is as if they are implicitly saying, “I’m right and you’re wrong.” They have an underlying need to make others wrong to have some power over them. If I’m right and you’re wrong, then I have more right than you to control the situation. Like my Social One father always used to say: “I’ve never been wrong, except once, when I thought I was wrong, but I was mistaken.”

Social Ones learn to repress emotions from a very early age; they were usually good kids who did not cause problems. They may have been young adults who acted “older” than they really were, who often forgot that they were children.

A person of this subtype may purposely not adjust to changing times or customs. A Social One tends to persist in a particular way of doing things that she thinks is right, despite others having evolved into doing it a different way. This One displays the general attitude, “This is how it is and I’m going to tell you how it should be.”

Not surprisingly, Social Ones automatically take on the role of teacher. Social Ones have the sense that demonstrating and modeling what they are teaching is equally or more valuable than what that say. It’s the idea that a good model goes a long way toward making the point being taught. They may also be unaware of the need to appear superior, but may receive feedback from others that they are acting like a “know-it-all.”

This is the Type One who resembles Type Five in that this character can be more introverted and may seem a bit “above it all” and emotionally detached. They separate themselves from the crowd because they are perfect and therefore superior. They never feel completely comfortable in the groups they frequent; they tend to feel alienated. But while Fives focus primarily on conserving energy and resources, Ones focus more on making things perfect and their anger is closer to the surface.

In relationships, Social Ones can have high expectations. They tend to have more confidence in themselves than in others. They can seem remote at times, being self-sufficient to the point of not seeming to need others. It can also prove difficult for partners and friends to convince Social Ones that a perspective other than their own can be correct. They are great reasoners and will argue their point energetically. They dominate through making the other person wrong, and it can be hard to convince them of the validity of a competing point of view.

Francis, a Social One, speaks:

In my daily life, I tend to put a lot of energy into getting things right, and then get annoyed when others don’t. For example, one thing I hate is when people park over the line of a parking space, because now the space beside it is too small for me to park my car. I therefore make a point of always parking right between the lines when I park my car (sometimes to my wife’s utter exasperation: “I can’t get out on my side!”), because that’s the right way to behave and that’s the way I would like everyone else to behave. So it’s not so much being picky as it is about setting an example for everyone else.

In my profession as an orchestra conductor, my attention to detail in preparing for a rehearsal gives me great confidence when it’s time to step in front of the orchestra at a performance. It’s like when you know you’ve prepared well for a test. I know the music well, I’ve gone over every part, and I’m confident that I can set a good example to inspire the players to make good music.

Compare to a sexual 7 @Kim and @Adam Strange who types himself a sexual 8 (I think).

 

The Sexual Eight: “Possession”


Sexual Eights have a strong antisocial tendency. People with this subtype are provocative people who express lust through open rebellion—through declaring in word and deed that their values differ from the norm. Along with being the most rebellious of the Eight subtypes, the Sexual Eight is, interestingly, also the most emotional.

This outspoken, rebellious Eight likes to be seen as bad – or at least they don’t mind it -- and they tend not to feel any guilt over the rebellious things they do. It’s almost a matter of pride for Sexual Eights to go against the stream of convention or to disrespect rules and laws.

In childhood, many of these Eights experienced disrespect and a lack of affection and attention from one or both parents, so they decided (consciously or unconsciously) not to recognize maternal or paternal authority. This first rebellion against authority became the template for their strong rebellious tendencies.

The name given to the Sexual Eight is “Possession,” which refers to a kind of charismatic taking over (or dominance) of the whole environment—an energetic capture of people’s attention. These Eights display the idea of “Possession” in that they can take over a whole scene energetically, becoming the center of things. Sexual Eights like to feel their power by possessing everyone’s attention. They express the idea that “the world begins to run when they arrive.”³²

Sexual Eights express a need for dominance and power over others. They don’t want to lose control of anything or anyone, and they want to influence people with their words. Everything—whether it is a person or a material thing—is an object to possess. These Eights don’t seek material security; rather, they seek to get power over people, things, and situations.

In getting and maintaining this power, Sexual Eights can be fascinating and charismatic. Their power comes through a kind of seductiveness and intensity that differentiates them stylistically from the other two Eight subtypes. As Naranjo explains, these Eights have more colors in their feathers; they are more magnetic and more outspoken. They have great powers of seduction.

These Eights look voraciously for love, sex, and excessive pleasure in life. They seek adventures, risks, challenges, and the thrill of an adrenaline rush. In line with their passionate forward movement into action, they may be particularly intolerant of weakness, dependence, and slow people.

As the most emotional of the Eights, the Sexual subtype displays a great deal of passion that may at times get expressed through emotions that may seem surprising to others and atypical for the other Eights. In these very passionate, emotional Eights, there’s often a detachment of the intellect—while Sexual Eights may be very intelligent, they express action and passion more than contemplation in the things they do.

These Eights feel things deeply. This capacity can benefit a good relationship, but it can be a problem when a relationship isn’t going well.In romantic settings, Sexual Eights may encourage their partners to become very dependent on them or to treat them as the energetic center of their lives.They demand loyalty, but may not be faithful in return. (England’s King Henry VIII may serve as an example.) And they tend to have possessive relationships not only with lovers, but also with friends, objects, places, and situations.

This subtype can usually be readily recognized as Eights and is as not likely to be confused with other types. They may look like Sexual Fours in that both types can be angry, emotional, and demanding, but Sexual Eights distinguish themselves in their deeply confident (or overconfident) manner in contrast with the Sexual Fours’ sense of inner deficiency.

Kathy, a Sexual Eight, speaks:

As a Sexual Eight, I like to have a small group of trusted and trusting people around me. When my circle becomes too large, I become uncomfortable and withdraw. I like to be all things to the people in my inner circle, and when that circle becomes unmanageable, it makes me a little “crazy.” Others can definitely feel it when I start to pull away. Those who are closest to me definitely notice when I am overcome by people who “need” too much.

On the other hand, I seem to “take care” of those around me. My sexual instinct can make this look like I am dominating or controlling the people around me. Although I am usually very conscious of my power over others, it is often difficult for others to resist the temptation to indulge me. I am absolutely charismatic and can convincingly bring others toward me without appearing to want adulation. People tend to think of me as a “guru,” and for the most part I lead and others follow without question. I have been told that my power is like a narcotic to others. And it happens without my having an awareness that it’s happening.

My sexual instinct also makes me one of those rare people who can cross others’ usual boundaries without making them uncomfortable. I genuinely care about others and that translates into others feeling protected and safe in my presence. Someone close to me made this observation and it resonates with me: “People in your presence find themselves hanging onto your every word…looking to you for approval…seeming submissive and overcome with awe. There is the sense that you are continually looking for an equal—someone who will provide that for you.”

I have been told that I exude sexuality. I am overtly sexual; I speak openly and frankly about sex. Perhaps it is partly for shock value, but it is never meant to be offensive. It is an honest and beautiful part of me and it also communicates my vulnerability. I have been told that one cannot be in a room with me without feeling my sexual presence or life force. I think it is part of what makes me so appealing. The charisma is hard to resist.

Naranjo was correct about Sexual Eights. Our colors are more vivid. As a Sexual Eight, my colors shine brightly, except for those times when my energy is zapped by my need to be both protector and protected. I feel an intense passion and zest for life. My energy is bountiful and bold. My powers of seduction can be consuming. Because I need what I give, I am not afraid to be vulnerable. I believe it is precisely this trait that makes me a gifted leader and teacher.

 

The Sexual Seven: “Suggestibility”


Individuals with the Sexual Seven subtype are gluttons for things of the higher world—for optimistically seeing things as they could be in the ideal world of their imaginations. Sexual Sevens are dreamers with a need to imagine something better than stark, ordinary reality. These Sevens have a passion for embellishing everyday reality, for being too enthusiastic, and for idealizing things and seeing the world as better than it actually is. Their gluttony gets expressed as a need for idealization.

Sexual Sevens are not as interested in the things of this world as they are in the things of a more highly advanced dimension. They look at the sky as an escape from the earth; they are more “heavenly” than “earthy.” People with this subtype are light-hearted enjoyers with a need to dream and to idealize and embellish the ordinary. In line with this tendency, they can be very idealistic and somewhat naive.

These Sevens tend to look at things with the optimism of somebody who is in love. Everything looks better when you are in love, and the Sexual Seven takes refuge in this kind of ideal, positive experience as a way of unconsciously avoiding what might be unpleasant in life. They focus on a highly positive view of life to distract themselves from the uncomfortable or scary emotions they would rather remain unaware of.

It is said that “love is blind.” Naranjo contends that Sexual Sevens may be said to be blind in this same sense: they display a bit too much enthusiasm and optimism and pay disproportionate attention to the positive data in a situation. These Sevens can fall in love very intensely, and they relate to their world through dreaming and imagination. They imagine what the world could be, and they can believe that this optimistic view is real.

In this way, Sexual Sevens express a need to fantasize, a need to dream, or a need for rose-colored glasses. These Sevens have a tendency to be too happy. They display a need to live in a charmed reality, to fantasize—to live in a world they create in their minds rather than the actual external world. This can be seen as an overcompensation that reflects an unconscious desire to deny or avoid the painful or boring or frightening parts of life. Sexual Sevens tend to experience an underlying fear of getting stuck in these kinds of feelings and so take refuge in optimism.

This Seven’s need to dream is a form of idealization—a passion for viewing life as it could be or as they imagine it to be; a tendency to live for the sweetness in a dreamed-of or imagined world rather than for the ordinary and not-so-interesting reality. They don’t want to pay attention to anything bad or difficult that might be happening.

Sexual Sevens think, “I’m okay, everything’s okay.” Naranjo points out that this way of thinking is very therapeutic for everyone who is not a Seven. Sexual Sevens often had some sort of painful experience growing up and they’ve adopted a sense of lightness as a defense against feeling their pain. They defensively take refuge in a happy, or excessively happy, and expansive mood that operates as a way of unconsciously diverting themselves from recognizing and feeling a deeper pain. It’s like walking lightly above things or hovering at an elevated level as a means of escaping the uncomfortable emotions.

The name given to this type is “Suggestibility,” which implies a readiness to be mentally flexible and imaginative—but it also has to do with being gullible, easy to hypnotize, and susceptible to the infection of enthusiasm. Naranjo points out that Sexual Sevens’ cognitive defenses are shaped as suggestion, fantasy, and illusion. They can naively believe that people are what they say they are, and they can be very trusting, seeing the world and people in beautiful, perhaps overly positive, terms. They run to an idyllic future and away from a potentially uncomfortable or painful present. They display a prevalence of thought and imagination over feeling and instinct.

In terms of personal style, Sexual Sevens are people who like to talk a lot. They are verbose and excited by their own discourse, and their speech is characterized by a flow of “wonderful ideas and possibilities.” They can also play the role of the carefree clown whom nothing seems to affect. People with this subtype tend to use ironic humor, which can be escapist, and they test limits through seduction and humor. They seek acceptance, appreciation, and recognition, and they manipulate through seduction.

Sexual Sevens plan and improvise a lot. They believe that they can do everything, and they feel a need to plan or mount successful strategies that will ensure their pleasure. They may experience anxiety, however, about the difficulty of engaging in many scenarios at once and having to give something up. They can have a restless and anxious energy, which can take the outer form of doing things on many fronts and engaging in many activities at the same time. Their excitement and anxiety can cloud their perception of reality. At times they may rebel through passive-aggression, which they tend to do by living in their imagination—relating to situations as they would like them to be and not taking action in the real world.

Sexual Sevens see the world as a marketplace of outstanding opportunities: the more you take, the more you can enjoy. These Sevens express excitement about the possibility of consuming many experiences—everything is exciting and spectacular—like someone who goes to a bakery and wants to try a bit of everything. They find a sense of satisfaction in being able to have it all, in not missing or losing out on anything.

Contrary to what we might expect from this “Sexual” Seven subtype, this Seven is not so much focused on sex as they are on the essence of love. Sexual Sevens fall in love very easily, but they’re not as interested in having sex with someone as they are in attaining a kind of idealized ultimate connection. Sexuality itself stays primarily in the head for these characters. It’s a normal sexuality on one hand, but it’s a promise for a bigger opening to a mystical union on the other.

Sexual Sevens are gluttons for things of the higher world, and this makes them dreamers. They often feel an attraction to spiritual or metaphysical experience, as well as to extraordinary or esoteric things. Earthly, mundane things can be very hard to bear for a person who lives in a more idealized mental reality, and so this individual can have an intense dislike for activities they find routine, tedious, or boring.

For the Sexual Seven, earthly things take effort, and can therefore feel boring or tedious, whereas the mind works so easily and without friction. It’s so much easier to imagine doing something than to actually do it. So, this Seven finds comfort—indulging a kind of worldly laziness—in imagining instead of doing.

Adam, a Sexual Seven, speaks:

I deeply resonate with the description of the Sexual Seven. While I have never been a glutton for things or substances, I have been a glutton for idealization, learning, and good energy. In order to feel okay, I have generally needed to feel positively “stoked.” In fact, my nickname in high school was “EnthusiAdam.” I was very excited about most facets of my life, and my enthusiasm was contagious. This characterization of me has remained fairly constant, although I have mellowed somewhat as I’ve aged.

I have also thought of myself as a serious romantic, and much of my thinking is consistent with an enneatype of Four: I love deeply, I love being in love, and I have always longed for love. As such, I was very careful about who I chose as my wife. I needed to be unequivocal about this important decision—and, thankfully, I chose well. I have been madly in love with her for the now more-than-eleven years we’ve been together. What is now a reality was previously a dream that I spent much time visualizing and fantasizing about, and I’m now aware that these activities are consistent with this subtype.

I have a strong dislike for the mundane. I find mindless chatter difficult to bear, and I really, really can’t stand housework. The only way I can do housework is by distracting myself with an MP3 of a stimulating lecture and being left alone while I do my chores. Then, at least, I’m learning—the time is not a total waste and my gluttony for learning is satisfied.

Lastly, I have spent a great deal of time fantasizing about my ideal retirement. For me, that retirement would involve traveling with my beloved wife, plenty of intellectual stimulation, endless fun, and tons of time for deep connection with her.

[Kim]

I do like to get along. But I have a lot of "contra" within that I withhold, a lot of the time. I am always telling myself, "your view is not what matters here." Which contradicts my desire to express it! Because I have a view, often contradictory. I will focus on respecting what a person says/does/believes in because the higher value is that of seeing and validating the goodness of a person, and that "holds back" the lesser value of my expressing contradictory views, particularly when they are not sought.

Which i would consider sync flow and so first. Everyone wants to express their views, that is not being contra. Sx first will not forego pushing against and stirring the pot for the sake of social harmony. Social harmony can only be created by pushing against forces that threaten it.

[Eliza Thomason]

Which i would consider sync flow and so first. Everyone wants to express their views, that is not being contra. Sx first will not forego pushing against and stirring the pot for the sake of social harmony. Social harmony can only be created by pushing against forces that threaten it.

Which i would consider sync flow and so first. Everyone wants to express their views, that is not being contra. Sx first will not forego pushing against and stirring the pot for the sake of social harmony. Social harmony can only be created by pushing against forces that threaten it.

But what about the sx/so subtypings?? That's what I am asking about. Did I guess your type right? Do you personally know people who are one of the other subcategories of sx/so? Can you share any thoughts on how you made that distinction (if you did)? That's what I am wondering about. Not contra/syn.

I will read up on contra/syn some other time, and after i feel conversant in it. I may have questions on that, and if I do, I will post those questions on a new thread. But right now, in this thread, I am interested in commentary and people's personal self-typings and personal experiences with the different types of sx first. Also the different types of so-first would be interesting. But getting side-tracked is not something that I want to do here. I'm considering within stackings. That's what I am looking for. Anything related to that. Maybe people here are not conversant on it? That's why the subject change? I don't know.

Oh - is that why you did not comment on the topic posed? You don't feel knowledgeable on stacking variances?

[lynn]

Also the different types of so-first would be interesting. But getting side-tracked is not something that I want to do here. I'm considering within stackings. That's what I am looking for. Anything related to that.

i would also be interested in further information on the different variations of the stackings, because some descriptions are a bit too vague for me. with some stackings it's easier (e.g. sx/so flirter is usually very noticeable), but with social-firsts i have way more difficulties. ( lightside vs. darkside so/sx? no clue on that.) has anyone here a bit more insight on that?

[Eliza Thomason]

I'm sp first and procrastinate the hell out of doing that stuff. Somehow, I actually have really good credit though. I think that's purely because I don't like to spend what I don't have and I like to keep my debts low because it will stress me out emensley otherwise. Not enough people seem to give a fuck about debt, but it's actually very important to me. I will usually put my extra/birthday money/etc. twords my bills rather than buy some frivolous thing that I don't need.


I had an sp last roommate who would constantly make impulsive purchases and would get herself into tremendous debt. She would get herself into trouble and not be able to pay her bills, so she'd cry to her boss about it and end up getting loans from her then owe her boss money. Girl was a mess.

I like to avoid stress too so I like to avoid debt and live within my means... but I am not so disciplined (though I aim to be). I tend to budget by keeping a vague balance in my mind (close to overspending, so I better be careful, or, budget is generous currently so I can spend - not even using any figures. I actually live on faith basically. When I was married we had the fruits of stability, living within our means and a steady income. After divorce it was frightening with my unsteady pay and paying rent and bills. I just learned to live on faith. I figured one day I would marry a man who was "set" and could give me back the stability taken away with the divorce. Well when I met my husband, he said, "I am a ruin" and really things were not looking too good for him financially. But I fell in love, and I figured, my lessons of trusting God for finances were hard won, and I wouldn't not waste that lesson, but keep in trusting Him. Our budget is tight but we live within in our means and our happiness is each other. And our biggest expenditure is our big renovation project. For that we are always asking the intercession of St. Joseph - who will have a place in this new room. So long story short, my budget is vague and I trust in God for my finances. Because I don't like to worry about it...