"Mistyped" SX firsts

[Neokortex]

@Neokortex

I am not saying your ideas are wrong per se; but I feel like you are twisting reality to what you would like it to be, ignoring things that don't fit it. IMO, it's best to relax and accept things the way they actually are. Just from my own experience anyway, it's upto you.

[√1]I'm biased in that way but at the same time it helps noticing trends and with the head type sx/sp 6 and tertiary gut type, I do investigate the underbelly of these emotional/aesthetic trends/facades. That may annoy some who invest political/economic capital in these emotions and Images. Such as Sx heart types, emotional leaders. I agree that I should be more assertive with my emotions instead of criticizing (contra-flow/frustration bc of my emotional conformism) the hell out of these people but since there's no ultimate authority on typology theory (or on the absoluteness of any religion or political creed), opportunism roams and "the way [things] actually are" is up for grabs (until I get kicked out from the forum).[√2]Enneagram may not be the most explicit about what I wrote back there but if you want I can go through all the descriptions I've culled and use the Enneagram language to indicate how they also imply my understanding. Beyond personal experiences I've also been leaning on what Jon Haidt terms "the glauconian nature of human" (i.e. social connivance) in his The Righteous Mind. The latter is hard to prove but we all know that covert/pokerfaced cooperation/ complicity/corruption are as old as the species.[√3]

Sx/Sos are also "players" because like socials, they also use the social primarily to derive resources and gain protection - I believe in @Bumblyjack's defense of this. They may piggyback on and front a group's certain (heart, head, gut) need, while using their charisma to assert their own particulars (e.g. make certain sexual styles or emotion types culturally acceptable, resurgent) but when their promises are not delivered by reality, they may take the common share of wealth of the members and jump ship (like politicians or businessmen do). Such leaders or people with higher status may have been/be here on the forum, indicating Sx-dom. People may have accepted their definition of it or the Sx-dom image to conform to and pass into the hierarchy. "Sx-dom," then, may have been colored by the connotation "I am passionate about mystical/spiritual insights because I am earnestly on the path of soul searching, inner enlightenment." It would mean chiming in with the mystical "vibe," being emotionally attune, sensitive to receive these "teachings."

This "apprentice of Typology" is, of course just an online persona/avatar manifest in mystical and artistic imagery in forum (social) user's tumblr posts, as well as forum "porn" that they associate with instincts and types. Not all emotional intuitions are incorrect but they aren't impartial, either. This is a make-believe "magical/digital" practice that people hope would get them closer to discovering a valuable hidden self or capability. All the while, though, they slack in looking into the darker recesses of their precious soul (perhaps expecting the stern and honest feedback from the groupthink's shared responsibility). "Sx-dom" may be the dress code for the sect where people want to get rich or have sex with the members all the same but with "Sx-dom" mask showing membership and pure intent of "spiritual self-development"/"serving the higher goal of typology."

[√1]

Yeah, I put a bit of a religious flair in there, so that the heart type people on the forum could relate. I'm a social heart type as well and I admit to being complicit with/chameleoning of other groups' Image. Perhaps something to do with the naïveté of INFPs, I feel I can tune into grand national narratives, collective emotions. In this way I don't criticize the aesthetic and formalism that these emotions sediment into: the iconography of (folk) art, the shape of the sound of foreign language, the embelishments of their musical style, etc. Sx/Sps risk the social for their ideals more but there's at least some conformity that which keeps them with the tribe, until they notice the cracks and start wandering again (e.g. fellow volunteer who stayed on the side of Christian circles but also kept up his criticism of people for showing fake emotions. That doesn't bother me, I'm gullible about emotions but when they belie intent, that's a problem).

[√2]

Social types have, actually, been criticized in social psychology (e.g. Solomon Asch's conformity experiments, Stanley Milgram's authority obedience experiments; Stanford Prison experiment and if you want more, I can feed you more DD); in culture studies (Sigfried Kracauer's Mass Ornament); in literature (Huxley's Brave New World; Catch 22), in theatre (Imre Madách's The Tragedy of Man; Shakespeare's "All the world's a stage/and And all the men and women merely players" in As You Like It but it originates from way before); in film (Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956); The Truman Show (1998)); in painting (zoomorphism/theriocephaly) etc.

[√3]

Haidt cited modern views on evolution to how group cooperation (survival of groups, races) is, in the long run advantageous for the survival of the individual's genes. This can also lead to complacency but luckily, the species is not "eusocial." Even our bodies are the synergetic symbiosis of multiple species (hologenome theory, thus multilevel selection).