# Instinctive Variant Discussion



## Liontiger (Jun 2, 2009)

One step closer!

I decided my variant stacking is actually so/sp and not sx/sp. Intensity makes me uncomfortable; why in the world would I think I was sx? :crazy:

Now: 9w1 - 2w3 - 6w7 so/sp


----------



## Vaka (Feb 26, 2010)

White said:


> One step closer!
> 
> I decided my variant stacking is actually so/sp and not sx/sp. Intensity makes me uncomfortable; why in the world would I think I was sx? :crazy:


I have a hard time understanding SX, though I think I understand SP and SO. So SX is about 'intensity'?


----------



## Liontiger (Jun 2, 2009)

Paranoid Android said:


> I have a hard time understanding SX, though I think I understand SP and SO. So SX is about 'intensity'?


That's kind of my impression of it. It's about craving experience and chasing after it, being assertive. Sx's are passionate people...I think :laughing:


----------



## Paradigm (Feb 16, 2010)

Paranoid Android said:


> I have a hard time understanding SX, though I think I understand SP and SO. So SX is about 'intensity'?


From my understanding of SX, it's many things. It's about putting your all into everything, especially relationships. You'd focus on one person or a very small group (3-4 people max) more than you would the overall dynamic of things. An SX-first person would feel that being powerful (confident, assertive, attractive) would be better focusing on safety/comfort (SP) or blending in (SO). They'd be more likely to speak up about things since it would prove they're not taking "it" lying down.

The above might be more Six-oriented since the last SX description I read was for Sixes.


----------



## Aßbiscuits (Oct 8, 2009)

White said:


> That's kind of my impression of it. It's about craving experience and chasing after it, being assertive. Sx's are passionate people...I think :laughing:


I get that impression, too. I'm never satisfied because I'm waiting for something to complete me and that makes me intense, searching all the time (Seems to be a word that gets flung at me a lot, intense, makes me imagine myself with a red puffy face shouting at people though ). 

Maybe that's the 4 talking. Stfu 4. Nobody likes you.


----------



## Vaka (Feb 26, 2010)

White said:


> That's kind of my impression of it. It's about craving experience and chasing after it, being assertive. Sx's are passionate people...I think :laughing:


I was also reading this page: How the Enneagram Personality System Works
I may have a general idea of it. 

I was thinking that I might be sp/sx rather than sp/so. I think a couple of things that made me think I had more SO than SX were more SX-ish.


----------



## screamofconscious (Oct 15, 2009)

Sx is all about connection. For those who are not sx first, those who are seem very intense in the way they reach out for connection. Ever have a stranger tell you their life story? They were probably sx first. Did it make you feel uncomfortable or strike you as very odd? You're probably not sx first. I'm sp/sx. I don't usually get uncomfortable with the life story so much as annoyed if I happen to not be interested...but I'm usually very polite about it since it occurs to me that the other probably just needs a friend or is very lonely.


----------



## IheartFootball10 (Sep 25, 2010)

White said:


> That's kind of my impression of it. It's about craving experience and chasing after it, being assertive. Sx's are passionate people...I think :laughing:


I'm sx, you pretty much hit the nail right on the head.


----------



## Vaka (Feb 26, 2010)

screamofconscious said:


> Sx is all about connection. For those who are not sx first, those who are seem very intense in the way they reach out for connection. Ever have a stranger tell you their life story? They were probably sx first. Did it make you feel uncomfortable or strike you as very odd? You're probably not sx first. I'm sp/sx. I don't usually get uncomfortable with the life story so much as annoyed if I happen to not be interested...but I'm usually very polite about it since it occurs to me that the other probably just needs a friend or is very lonely.


SX is purely about strong connections with people?
In that case, I think I'm probably sx-last as I think those things make me very uncomfortable.

I think the most confusing thing about instinctual variants is that, for instance, a person may have a withdrawn enneagram type and have traits that seem sp-ish, but not be sp-first. 
I think sp/so is most likely for me, though.


----------



## susurration (Oct 22, 2009)

Paranoid Android said:


> I was thinking that I might be sp/sx rather than sp/so. I think a couple of things that made me think I had more SO than SX were more SX-ish.


 I thought that too for a while, but then I kind of saw that I was motivated to do SO type things for SX reasons. 

~

Mario Sikora has some different (and a little controversial) ideas on 'variants' and i'll pull out some things from articles;


*Self Pres*



> There is common agreement on the term “self-preservation” for the first subtype and it
> seems to be pretty accurate. In a sense, the purpose of all of our genetically based instincts
> is preservation of the gene, and this instinct is focused on fundamental survival and well-
> being of the host—that is, the individual. Fundamentally, this instinct relates to nesting and
> ...


From my sp/sx point of view: I am really affected and intune with peoples levels of healthiness. I have high expectations in this arena more than anything else, and paradoxically I still -encourage-, facilitate, or judge people based on this main criteria, even if I am unhealthy myself. Sp in theory comes off as selfish, but I want people to be healthy too. I tend to take on mentoring roles, because I'm only as healthy as my environment, and I like every chain in the link to "be like me" by looking after theirselves in a sense. Often you can see your own tendencies by the way you expect others to be (because usually we expect them to be like ourselves). Strangely, when I'm unhealthy, my way of feeling in control, is by -strongly- encouraging other people to be healthy and getting angry when they don't try theirselves. 

I know a sp-dom, and we tend to talk about theories of spiritual or otherwise growth a lot. When we are unhealthy, our way of helping each other, is giving each other advice (exercise, balance, some sort of buddhism practice, meditation... it's an information sharing exercise). We often talk about the nutritional content of foods, etc. And we actually put these things into practice instead of just talking, on the down side, taken to excess, i've seen my friend sometimes becoming obsessive about them. As I have seen with myself. We are both inconsistent in the sense that for the most part, while we are extremely self disciplined, but when we go off the rails, by god we go off the rails. And no one else is allowed to save us. Only us. It's our battle, and our battle alone. When I decide not to care, it's still my problem and my problem alone. Myself, and the SP's I have known, can be very stubborn in this arena. I don't like being told what's good for me, or if you assume the wrong things. I get pissed when people try to look after me. When they try to help by giving me information or resources and letting me go off myself, it's good and I really respect this person. When they do things "for my own good" or try and make me dependent on them... oh boy. I blow up. 

I'm not so interested in possessions. My room isn't decorated at all. But I do find myself being effected by sensory things a lot. Like the colours of the room i'm in, whether it feels safe and "homely". 

When I am unhealthy, I know it. I can see it coming from a mile, and I become catatonic. I cannot function until I pick myself up, and I'm arrogant enough to know that I eventually will. Your dom orientation doesn't have to be something you're good at; it can be your biggest problem to deal with at certain points. And it certainly has been mine. ________________________________________________________________________________
*
Social*



> There is also common agreement on the term “social” for the next instinct, though this
> instinct is often misunderstood. This instinct is not about gregariousness, it is a drive to
> orient oneself toward the group; i.e., it helps one answer the questions, “Where and how do
> I fit into my society?” and “How do I compare to others?” It is often taught that someone who
> ...



I can relate a little to this; i'm really interested in politics and social change. But, I_ loathe_ bureaucracy, and this can result in many problems if you want to make real changes in the world. I tend to berate people for being irresponsible and being destructive instead of contributing (my biggest pet peeve), but I suppose all of us can do that. 

I've noticed heavy So's tend to ingratiate with the 'top dogs' of a group. Or with a group altogether. They come out of the woodwork when you gain a little status. They tend to talk about people or what other people are doing (which bores me to tears, but it's like catnip to them). 

Can't say much more, because I don't think i'm entirely in touch with it.
___________________________________________________________________________________

The sx description is where it gets a little contentious...

*SX*



> Some who teach the subtypes try to get around this discomfort by labeling this subtype as
> the “intimacy” or “one-to-one” subtype, and this is where the problem begins (though I use
> the word “intimacy” in training programs). This instinct is not about platonic bonding with
> another; this instinct is about attracting and mating with another.
> ...





> Sometimes referred to as a “one-to-one” instinct, this category is easily misunderstood. To understand it
> better, we must bear in mind the elliptical nature of evolution. This category is not simply an instinctive drive
> toward one-to-one relationships, it is a cluster of interrelated instinctive behaviors that serve the purpose of
> attracting attention to ourselves and improving our chances of mating (in the sense of “pairing” rather than
> ...


^ makes sx sound like a raging hormonal teenager/peacock, right? I don't completely agree, but admittedly I do relate to some of these things. I think intensity shouldn't be taken out of the equation though, I have a sx dom sister, who I swear creates conflict for the sake of the buzz sometimes. 

I wrote about this on typoc recently but.. 
To me, around other sx's there's a kind of energy that you bounce back and fourth. There will often be some kind of subtle sexual banter or sexual jokes. But you don't see the real energy unless they really like you. I'm very closed off to attention I don't want. I don't want intensity from everything and everyone. I want to control the flow of intensity because of how extra sensitive I am to it. 
If I do want you, you'll know it. Because I will pursue and I will make it known (though I don't get clingy). And then the rest of the world disappears. My energy can only go into one person at a time and I kind of ignore people i'm not interested in (though it can also mean they make me shy). If you move towards me and I don't like you, i'll back away. If I do like you, but i'm already talking to someone else (not even necessarily involved, but I am interested in them), I will also back away.

To me, there's a huge difference to how I view different people and the amount I give of myself. I very rarely "like" people not even romantically, but more in the sense that they enthrall me enough to open myself and give my energy to them. Because it's so intense, you can see why it's hard to just "give" that, or even find that in many things. Sometimes I don't know how much sx energy I have to give, that is until a person I really like comes along (rare) and only then, I truly blossom and see it. I always think, "I don't need anybody to complete me... i'm already whole". But sp/sx is described as going through a "sexuality as awakening" process, and it's as if it's not until you experience or come into contact with intimacy, that you even realise you do need it, and it is important to your own growth.

You can have a dysfunctional relationship with sx issues... but it's more about your motivation. A sx can live a lot of their relationships in their head, but the point is, whether or not they really care about whether they do or do not live relationships in their head, and whether it's the focus of their attention.


----------



## Liontiger (Jun 2, 2009)

Great. You're making me question myself, Nova :laughing:

Based on your post, I would say I'm sp/sx, which is where I originally started  I'm definitely not so. I like being part of a group, yes, but it's not about status. I pay attention to my close friends to make sure they're okay - healthy, as you say. I'm friendly with lots of people because it makes me feel good, and it eases social (my) discomfort. That would be displaying SO for SP reasons, right?



Nova said:


> To me, around other sx's there's a kind of energy that you bounce back and fourth. There will often be some kind of subtle sexual banter or sexual jokes. But you don't see the real energy unless they really like you. I'm very closed off to attention I don't want. I don't want intensity from everything and everyone. I want to control the flow of intensity because of how extra sensitive I am to it.
> If I do want you, you'll know it. Because I will pursue and I will make it known (though I don't get clingy). And then the rest of the world disappears. *My energy can only go into one person at a time and I kind of ignore people i'm not interested in* (though it can also mean they make me shy). If you move towards me and I don't like you, i'll back away. If I do like you, but i'm already talking to someone else (not even necessarily involved, but I am interested in them), I will also back away.
> 
> To me, there's a huge difference to how I view different people and the amount I give of myself. I very rarely "like" people not even romantically, but more in the sense that they enthrall me enough to open myself and give my energy to them. Because it's so intense, you can see why it's hard to just "give" that, or even find that in many things. Sometimes I don't know how much sx energy I have to give, that is until a person I really like comes along (rare) and only then, I truly blossom and see it. I always think, "I don't need anybody to complete me... i'm already whole". But sp/sx is described as going through a "sexuality as awakening" process, and* it's as if it's not until you experience or come into contact with intimacy, that you even realise you do need it, and it is important to your own growth.*


I can relate to a lot of this. I can be very romantically intense, though I do try to hold myself in and not let it happen. It tends to scare people off.


----------



## susurration (Oct 22, 2009)

White said:


> Great. You're making me question myself, Nova :laughing:
> 
> Based on your post, I would say I'm sp/sx, which is where I originally started  I'm definitely not so. I like being part of a group, yes, but it's not about status. I pay attention to my close friends to make sure they're okay - healthy, as you say. I'm friendly with lots of people because it makes me feel good, and it eases social (my) discomfort. That would be displaying SO for SP reasons, right?
> 
> ...


Ah, sorry white roud: it's only one source, so take it with a pinch of salt.

In regards to my own experiences, some of what I mentioned does look a little sp/so... and it is a little vague. I mean, what person (regardless of stacking) puts energy into people they don't like, right? I should've been a lot more specific and clarified a few things. Because many things I said could be applied to any type period. 

Can you elaborate more on your point about why you're friendly with lots of people? in real life, i'd generally say I was warm-ish and friendly-ish too. But I tend to neglect friends/contacts in favour of more "closer" friends (closer in my mind, more than the relationship itself) :\

Maybe you can try working backwards, what would you say you least desire out of sp, sx and so fixations? if you had to choose security via only 2 means, what one would you exclude (you could do without for a long period of time if you had to) and why? 

I know what you mean about the potential to scare people away too. When my bubble bursts and the walls come down, the banks of the river break. And the town floods. Unless they're willing to get wet and be completely immersed, people usually run for higher ground.That's the litmus test I suppose. I've run away from a few river bank floods of other people myself  Twins flames do not burn when only one candle is lit. But when they're both burning... the intensity is returned and shared. There's a balance of energy that is replenished by the other's flame. Sex is about creation... that's what sx is essentially to me (in my subjective opinion). Creation, birth, energy.. perhaps even eventually death. But most of all... synergy.


----------



## Liontiger (Jun 2, 2009)

Nova said:


> Ah, sorry white roud: it's only one source, so take it with a pinch of salt.
> 
> In regards to my own experiences, some of what I mentioned does look a little sp/so... and it is a little vague. I mean, what person (regardless of stacking) puts energy into people they don't like, right? I should've been a lot more specific and clarified a few things. Because many things I said could be applied to any type period.
> 
> ...


That's what makes the enneagram so difficult to understand: there are many different sources of information, many of which are contradictory or do not match up.

As for why I'm friendly with a lot of people, I do it to make myself more comfortable. I hate awkward silences, so I fill them by being warm and engaging. People find me easy to get along with because of this. These sorts of connections are limited to the present moment. I don't worry about them when we're not together, and I don't contact them unless I have a reason to. Relationships with my close friends, however, are carefully monitored and nourished. I have a couple close friends outside my main group in order to avoid being to "cliquey," but I generally spend most of my time and energy with close friends.

If I had sx and sp, I would definitely give up so. I need to be comfortable with myself in my own space, so sp is a given. I didn't realize how important sx was to me until I fell for someone, but it is such a driving force in my life. I can live without that connection, but it's hard. To forge an intimate relationship with someone (which I haven't successfully done yet), would be_heaven._


----------



## Vaka (Feb 26, 2010)

I was thinking I'm sp-first because a big factor in many of my smaller decisions(as in, it's the first thing that my mind brings to light in the decision-making process) is energy/time preservation for myself. Beyond that, it's hard to say. 

I'm going back to sp/so as my people-centered habits are not exactly focused on intimacy or strong connection. And I think I can relate to the so-attitude, but my first focus is still time/energy preservation. I think that at times, I try to find a way to orient myself toward the group while giving as little of myself as possible.

Also, I want to have an impact on people with my interests and hobbies. To me, that seems more sp/so-ish.


----------



## TreeBob (Oct 11, 2008)

I am a sx/sp myself.


----------



## screamofconscious (Oct 15, 2009)

TreeBob said:


> I am a sx/sp myself.


I question whether you aren't actually sp/sx. What's your understanding of the sexual component?


----------



## susurration (Oct 22, 2009)

Paranoid Android said:


> Also, I want to have an impact on people with my interests and hobbies. To me, that seems more sp/so-ish.


Reminds me of something I read on the ennea institute forum recently... 

I don't know how "theoretically correct" this is... (bear in mind it's from a five perspective though)



> Self-preservation is the obsession with survival. Bolstered by the social instinct it can become a valuing of prosperity. Success is not determined by one's standing among peers, but on the material quality of life one has achieved. What the sp/so needs is a legacy, something of value to leave to the world.
> 
> For the sp/so, self-survival is not enough. The social awareness, framed by the boundary-consciousness of sp, turns toward making sure there is survival for all. Progress, here represented by the technologically advanced city, is pursued to assuage existential sp-crises; and this pursuit of progress and security is extended to the broader group, to the community.
> 
> ...


Looking at this, I relate to it too...

And funnily I see it in a five who I know... (probably sp/so) then I compare it to my sp/sx sister... and they are very different energy and attention wise. Sp/so is just as self revealing in social realm as in 1 to 1 contact. Sp/sx.... very different around friends and close allies than in the social sphere. This doesn't mean it's like this in every case, just what I've noticed.


----------



## TreeBob (Oct 11, 2008)

screamofconscious said:


> I question whether you aren't actually sp/sx. What's your understanding of the sexual component?


I won't say you are wrong and if you can find me a good description then I will look at it. I know I am more SX/SP compared to SX/SO. Keep in mind this was written for a 8w7:



> Sexual/Self-pres
> 
> This subtype is a very charismatic. They have a very assertive energy and they demand attention. The lust of the Eight combines with the sexual instinct to make one of the most fiery of the combinations of all of the enneatypes, especially if Seven is the dominant wing. Sexual/self-pres Eights aren’t afraid to tell you what they think. The "can do" attitude that the other subtypes have is now intertwined with an outward passionate storm of energy. The sexual/self-pres Eight will be similar to the self-pres/sex Eight with respect to interests and attachment to close friends and family, but the intensity level is augmented. Since the sexual instinct is first, these Eights usually don't let an opportunity pass by to connect with those they find interesting. They can sense the power in any situation and they like to challenge people. They can enjoy making others react to them, keeping others on their toes, to find out what makes them tick. They are likely to use humor to accomplish this. When sex/self-pres Eights are unbalanced, they are very quick to anger and have a difficult time controlling their impulses.
> 
> ...


----------



## TreeBob (Oct 11, 2008)

I found another source with generic all type stacks:



> sx/sp
> This is perhaps the most internally conflicted of the stackings, and potentially the most inconsistent in behavior. This may occur as a blockage of the sexual instinct which can be redirected as a more generally brooding and troubled personality. They may isolate themselves for long periods of time before reemerging. They live according to a strictly personal outlook and are not particularly concerned with the approval of others outside of their immediate concern. They seem to be searching for something, the missing piece. If they find a soulmate they will unite without fanfare, forming a secret bond, dealing with formalities as an afterthought. Powerful sexual impulses facing inner resistance may manifest symbolically in the psyche, giving way to soulful interpretations of the unconscious. Under periods of stress severe sexual tensions may manifest as erratic, impulsively destructive behavior. Can seem restless, torn between the comforts of a stable home life and the urge to wander. May be prone to self-medicating.
> Motivation: to know the heart, reconcile inner conflict, form a secure union.
> Familiar roles: the devotee, the seeker, the wanderer
> ...


Again Sx/Sp is more me. I deleted the others but they didn't fit me. As for the SP/Sx type I don't really relate to this. Not totally anyway. Not sure I could ever be accused of being oblivious and I am certainly not hesitant in new relationships. And LOL to the taste and depth at home. hahaha


----------



## Liontiger (Jun 2, 2009)

Thank you to whoever split this thread (screamofconscious?). I didn't mean to derail :laughing:


----------



## Tucken (Dec 13, 2009)

I'm gonna have to argue the points of the sx description posted by Nova, just to make sx even more confusing . 


> "They focus more on their looks and appearance than the
> other subtypes, they wear more jewelry, and, generally, they talk about sex more than the
> other subtypes."


Doesn't ring true in my ears, and it's not because it sounds bad but because I find it distorted. It's possible that sx's focus more on their appearance than other types - but that doesn't mean we use more make-up or similar. 9's, as an example, are unselfconscious and the only thing I do for my appearance is to shower every second day or so. Maybe it depends on the individuals idea of beauty, but I question the generalization that Sx makes you take more proactive messures for appearance than other instincts. 
I think sx's may talk the LEAST about sex. Especially with other people than their intimate. 

Maybe sx is best described as awereness of the chemistry between yourself and other people. This is obviously true even for people you don't wish to mate with (speaking of it on a conscious level...),like friends.


----------



## screamofconscious (Oct 15, 2009)

TreeBob said:


> I won't say you are wrong and if you can find me a good description then I will look at it. I know I am more SX/SP compared to SX/SO. Keep in mind this was written for a 8w7:


I agree you're more sx/sp than sx/so. I just don't see sx first. I find that descriptions for types fall short though. Personally, I think it's far better to examine what the component means and how it's applied. Type descriptors are too narrow of a lens because there are so many variations even amongst the single type.

Nova posted some info on the sexual component in this thread. I've placed the most important parts in bold. Despite the fact that you're certainly one to turn heads, I don't see you putting most of your efforts into attracting attention from others. The analogy to peacocks below is perfect for the sexual first.


I think this description of a sexual first is very good. Nova has stated that it's on the controversial side. Perhaps that's because it isn't focused on the positive.



> Some who teach the subtypes try to get around this discomfort by labeling this subtype as
> the “intimacy” or “one-to-one” subtype, and this is where the problem begins (though I use
> the word “intimacy” in training programs). This instinct is not about platonic bonding with
> another; *this instinct is about attracting and mating with another.
> ...





> Sometimes referred to as a “one-to-one” instinct, this category is easily misunderstood. To understand it
> better, we must bear in mind the elliptical nature of evolution.* This category is not simply an instinctive drive
> toward one-to-one relationships, it is a cluster of interrelated instinctive behaviors that serve the purpose of
> attracting attention to ourselves and improving our chances of mating (in the sense of “pairing” rather than
> ...


----------



## screamofconscious (Oct 15, 2009)

Tucken said:


> I'm gonna have to argue the points of the sx description posted by Nova, just to make sx even more confusing .
> 
> Doesn't ring true in my ears, and it's not because it sounds bad but because I find it distorted. It's possible that sx's focus more on their appearance than other types - but that doesn't mean we use more make-up or similar. 9's, as an example, are unselfconscious and the only thing I do for my appearance is to shower every second day or so. Maybe it depends on the individuals idea of beauty, but I question the generalization that Sx makes you take more proactive messures for appearance than other instincts.
> I think sx's may talk the LEAST about sex. Especially with other people than their intimate.
> ...


Do you think it possible that you're not sx first? Even if you're not putting much effort into your physical appearance or talking about sex, do you find that you do the other things, such turning the attention towards you most of the time in some form?


----------



## screamofconscious (Oct 15, 2009)

White said:


> Thank you to whoever split this thread (screamofconscious?). I didn't mean to derail :laughing:


Haha...yes, it was me but that thread was getting derailed in a few different directions. No worries...the conversation is turning out great.


----------



## Tucken (Dec 13, 2009)

screamofconscious said:


> Do you think it possible that you're not sx first? Even if you're not putting much effort into your physical appearance or talking about sex, do you find that you do the other things, such turning the attention towards you most of the time in some form?


I'm quite sure but not 100%, I admit. 
Yes and no, as a 9 the attention part is a bit touchy. We secretly want attention but usually we seek it in.. inconspicuous ways. Back to the yes part- I must admit I do this:


> *there is a tendency to attract
> attention to by talking about themselves, boasting of their accomplishments or simply
> turning the conversation back to themselves in an attempt to be noticed.*


 The parts that you highlighted are pretty much the parts that I feel I relate to the most, as sx.

edit: You know the most basic thing I do to attract attention is to GIVE attention. I show that I'm interested in the other person through eye-contact and body language. It's usually enough to open your eyes wider and lean towards the other person.


----------



## susurration (Oct 22, 2009)

Tucken said:


> I'm gonna have to argue the points of the sx description posted by Nova, just to make sx even more confusing .
> 
> Doesn't ring true in my ears, and it's not because it sounds bad but because I find it distorted. It's possible that sx's focus more on their appearance than other types - but that doesn't mean we use more make-up or similar. 9's, as an example, are unselfconscious and the only thing I do for my appearance is to shower every second day or so. Maybe it depends on the individuals idea of beauty, but I question the generalization that Sx makes you take more proactive messures for appearance than other instincts.
> I think sx's may talk the LEAST about sex. Especially with other people than their intimate.
> ...


I think you're right about the sense that it can be different based upon someone's beauty ideal. And it's going to manifest differently in different types. I don't dress flamboyantly or reveal too much, but that's because I find subtlety sexy and I'm going to be real honest here \) when I say that if i'm focused on my appearance when going out, it's to look attractive to a certain type of person. Not to everybody, but for a very selective target audience. If I don't know anybody I don't really care, but if there's somebody I have a slight interest in, I'll wear perfume when I usually don't for example. It's not like a say, "i'm going to dress like this in order to attract people". It's almost completely unconscious. And you can see how it relates to sx, because it's almost like a courtship dance. 

If I can read my subconscious correctly here;
I generally go au naturale (not naked, but natural and effortless), because I find au naturale (doesn't put effort in, tries too hard, or covers self up with too many bells and whistles) damn sexy. And would want to attract someone with similar values. 

I remember once reading a person on here make the remark that they dress in certain band shirts or in a certain style to attract someone who listens to the same band, or who appreciates such a style. They were a four mind you, so her original tendency is to display her "identity" on the outside, but I think this is a sx type thing to do also. 

I think any subtype can do this, but it's more marked in the sx. Not everyone is in the image triad, so again a sx 3 and a sx 9 might approach this process differently. 

~
I think sx/so's might have the tendency to talk about sex a little more freely. I kind of find it sickening to reveal anything too personal or broadcast it to the mass public. But impersonal jokes about sex, or picking up on subtleties and honing in on them seem to appeal to some (but not all) sx's generally. I think cultural values or the environment one grew up in, might shape a persons willingness to discuss sex formally or informally and definitely (like you said) how intimate they are with a person.
Getting to know another likeminded sx when the interest is starting to rise, can become pretty heavy pretty quickly sometimes, and sexual banter (to the degree in which it feels safe) can be a way of bonding and keeping that energy flowing. I only speak for myself when I say that, I don't know how common that is for others.


----------



## susurration (Oct 22, 2009)

Tucken said:


> I'm quite sure but not 100%, I admit.
> Yes and no, as a 9 the attention part is a bit touchy. We secretly want attention but usually we seek it in.. inconspicuous ways. Back to the yes part- I must admit I do this: The parts that you highlighted are pretty much the parts that I feel I relate to the most, as sx.
> 
> edit: You know the most basic thing I do to attract attention is to GIVE attention. I show that I'm interested in the other person through eye-contact and body language. It's usually enough to open your eyes wider and lean towards the other person.


I think that last point is really really great. I never even thought to think of that! Body language is all part of the "mating game" right? and although someone might not be focused to much on their appearance and drawing someone to them, the way of showing their attention is via this more instinctual system of communication. 

We all do this as humans, but it may be marked and more conscious in sx's (although it can also work the opposite way, like being too shy to give eye contact). Just think about how holding eye contact with someone feels... it's intense. You can give yourself away or communicate by your eyes, in quite an intensive manner.


----------



## Vaka (Feb 26, 2010)

Nova said:


> Reminds me of something I read on the ennea institute forum recently...
> 
> I don't know how "theoretically correct" this is... (bear in mind it's from a five perspective though)
> Self-preservation is the obsession with survival. Bolstered by the social instinct it can become a valuing of prosperity. Success is not determined by one's standing among peers, but on the material quality of life one has achieved. What the sp/so needs is a legacy, something of value to leave to the world.
> ...


The thing I'm having a hard time relating to is having some focus on the self-preservation of all. I think that type fives want to have some niche for their knowledge or expertise that may make it valued in the world, so that does certainly seem more five-ish.

I'm not sure how exactly I might translate that to my six-ness, but I'm thinking it may be more of a manifestation of my full tri-fix. I think that part of my so-ish attitude comes from the desire to not cause conflict with people for my own sake. I prefer to be on my own and to focus on my interests, but my parents get angry and make a big deal out of it. So I find a way to preserve my time and energy as much as I can while checking myself in relation to the expectations my parents have on me. And I can see that same attitude of 'self-preservation' first and comparing my actions to external expectations to keep from creating unneeded drama or conflict, which seems more like a manifestation of my 9w8. I want to make my own decisions that seem best for me, but I want to be able to make that decision something that won't cause unnecessary drama. 

As for wanting to have an impact, that seems more three-ish. I desire to do something innovative that changes a field or a subject area, but that directly ties into the things I'm more comfortable spending time with alone. I suppose in a way, you could say I'm sp-ish with my time(using it with things that seem to matter more to me) for the hope of one day being able to have an impact on people with those things.

As for interdependency, I find a way to put in as much as I have to while still not giving too much.

The way I've heard instinctual variants described is that they are at the essence of a lot of our choices and decisions. I can definitely see that sp/so is at the essence of a lot of my decisions and actions in the way of wanting to do what I think is best or most comfortable for me or wanting to keep much of my energy and time while making sure my place in 'the group' is atleast neutral.


----------



## Tucken (Dec 13, 2009)

Nova said:


> I think you're right about the sense that it can be different based upon someone's beauty ideal. And it's going to manifest differently in different types. I don't dress flamboyantly or reveal too much, but that's because I find subtlety sexy and I'm going to be real honest here \) when I say that if i'm focused on my appearance when going out, it's to look attractive to a certain type of person. Not to everybody, but for a very selective target audience. If I don't know anybody I don't really care, but if there's somebody I have a slight interest in, I'll wear perfume when I usually don't for example. It's not like a say, "i'm going to dress like this in order to attract people". It's almost completely unconscious. And you can see how it relates to sx, because it's almost like a courtship dance.
> 
> If I can read my subconscious correctly here;
> I generally go au naturale (not naked, but natural and effortless), because I find au naturale (doesn't put effort in, tries too hard, or covers self up with too many bells and whistles) damn sexy. And would want to attract someone with similar values.
> ...


I pretty much agree with what you say here, but I have a question. Now people may say it's because of nurturing/marketing but I believe it's more important for females than it is to males to care for their looks. Because they want to attract the best partner- they do the attracting, then males come around and show to her what they've got. If you/someone agrees could it be applicable to the Sx instinct?



> I think that last point is really really great. I never even thought to think of that! Body language is all part of the "mating game" right? and although someone might not be focused to much on their appearance and drawing someone to them, the way of showing their attention is via this more instinctual system of communication.
> 
> We all do this as humans, but it may be marked and more conscious in sx's (although it can also work the opposite way, like being too shy to give eye contact). Just think about how holding eye contact with someone feels... it's intense. You can give yourself away or communicate by your eyes, in quite an intensive manner.


It's true for pretty much whatever it is you want. If you desire loyalty or love or respect- give it! and it comes around.


----------



## Scruffy (Aug 17, 2009)

Sp/Sx is a quiet intensity for me, I only desire a good few. I used to think I was Sp/So, but with some help, the Sx showed more than I thought I had.

"Fuck the rest"


From what I've seen on the internet, Sp/Sx seems to be the most common (like the tendency for introverts).


----------



## Paradigm (Feb 16, 2010)

I had to think a pretty good amount about my variants, too. In a way, I knew I was SP-first, yet all of the descriptions never quite fit perfectly. SP-first Sixes are said to be highly material-minded, but that's not really me: I don't buy more than I need (I'll actually run out of things because I didn't buy enough) and I don't do things like overpack. I _will_ stock up on things, but generally that only happens if I'm starting to get unhealthy; healthy me doesn't do that. The parts that do particularly ring true with me is that SP-first Sixes try to be warm and disarming, they're very visibily anxious, and they don't believe they can take care of themselves fully. 

But I have somewhat of an "odd" factor into all of this: my handicap. It makes sense that I wouldn't worry about things like having enough clothes because I'm too busy worrying about my health and what I have to do to maintain it. I worry like hell that my wheelchair isn't charged enough, for example. I worry I won't have enough supplies to last a while if something may happen. I create back-up plans of what to do if something does happen. The SP-first me worries about my health more than my comfort.

As Nova mentioned, I tend to fall into the "taking care of people" role. Perhaps that's because I've found it works best for me. It feels almost like protecting them, in a skewed fashion. I'll ignore strangers and acquaintances in favor of my close friends and family. Sometimes this "taking care of" leads me being run-down or overtaxed, in which case I change between withdrawing from and lashing out towards the person. I'm learning to say no and how to make time for myself. It's hard: I don't want to lose the security I've found by adopting this role.

But I don't think I'm SO-second. I compare myself to my undeniably SP/SO Six mom and it just doesn't fit. I don't have the awareness of people around me she does, nor the need to please people I won't meet more than once. Then again, I do have SO habits such as wanting to find a cause and questioning others. I actually see a lot of myself in the description of SP/SO, but it doesn't... feel right. I'm not focused on my sexuality too much, but I am focused highly on forging close relationships with select people. And I do start getting counterphobic if the circumstances are right (which I know isn't a requirement for SP/SX, but it's easier for that stacking to do so). Lots of my fear comes from being abandoned by "my people," which tends to--I think--manifest itself through the SP/SX stacking.


----------



## susurration (Oct 22, 2009)

To add some questions to the discussion;

1.What do you think are the effects of having one of the variants last? i.e. what is the effect of being sp, so or sx last?

2. Also, what kind of energy do you sense from certain variant stackings from your own perspective? i.e. "so/sx" = light and fluffy, "sp/so" warm but detached, for arguments sake. 

so/sx
so/sp
sx/sp
sx/so
sp/sx
sp/so

3. In what ways has your main variant caused you problems or lead to issues you had to deal with *throughout* your life (when you were younger and now)? same question for the 2nd and last variant you identify with. 

4. What's your relationship like with your first and second variants? do you see them as being hindrances or asset? 

5. How much do they drive you? do you experience them mildly or intensively? down what paths have they taken you? 

6. Do you embrace your instinctive variants and act in accordance with them? or do you act against them?


----------



## Vaka (Feb 26, 2010)

> What do you think are the effects of having one of the variants last? i.e. what is the effect of being sp, so or sx last?


You're asking just what we think, but I'm still gonna note that I may be talking out of my ass here :laughing:

I think SX concerns go against my natural instincts. It's like how I explained that my SP/SO-instincts often come out in the way of maintaining my self-preservation while only giving as much of myself as I have to. That means that my main focus is generally not on intimate connections, but on as much surface connection as is necessary. I think that SX-ish demands put on me seem to act against my self-preservation, but SO comes out as a shield or an aid, at points. I also think that the idea of attracting attention to myself would go against my self-preservation. SO seems to tactfully avoid SX concerns a lot of the time. I don't think that the SX instinctual focuses are often on my mind, I'm definitely SP/SO, it's just now that I'm dissecting it that it seems as if I try to avoid SX-ish matters for the sake of self-preservation.

In the very least, I can definitely say that a lot of what I've read about SX would go against my SP...

I actually think I'm the kind of person who views relationships as taking too much work and time LOL


----------



## Tucken (Dec 13, 2009)

Nova said:


> To add some questions to the discussion;
> 
> 1.What do you think are the effects of having one of the variants last? i.e. what is the effect of being sp, so or sx last?
> 
> ...


edit:Quote brackets...


----------



## Promethea (Aug 24, 2009)

I'm an sx/sp.

I find that I tend to strongly vibe with some individuals, very strongly, very quickly - and it can either go good, or bad. I have had many people marvel at how quickly we form a connection (other sx), or how curious about them I am (when they are sp, and not really as engaging in return as I am). For others who have an immediate, and negative reaction, many times they can't rationalize why they dislike me.. and I think it really bothers them that they can't justify wanting to punch me out. Many times when I can tell they feel this way, I sort of feel compelled to pull a Bugs Bunny routine, kiss them on the cheek, and say 'what's up doc?' The energy I get from riling them can be exciting. And many times they end up loving me rather than hating me. 

There are other times that I just need to stay on the down-low awhile and not be bothered by any sort of interaction. I have a real push-and-pull when it comes to how much of the stimulation I need, don't need.

I also have a problem where I will just walk away from a bond thats been created, without really looking back. I tend to bounce from one interesting person, to the next.. sort of exploring all that there is to explore, then moving on, into the unknown to explore something else. I have worked on this a lot as an adult, trying to keep friendships stable rather than see them as one exciting adventure after the next.

Introverts who are sx are more rare than introverts who are sp, and it can make an introvert seem more extroverted. I believe this is why people often tell me that I am an entp, rather than an intp. 

I have also been pondering this a bit as of late: an sx 5 will also seem less reserved than the sp 5 -- so perhaps some of those behaviors could mimic the 5 stress arrow to 7 behaviors in 5s, but actually just be part of the sx 5's antics. I know that I appear as a 7 frequently, for either reason, or perhaps both.


----------



## Vaka (Feb 26, 2010)

Despite my word vomit(which probably had nothing to do with anything anyway, I just like letting my mind wander), I'm starting to gravitate back to sp/sx over sp/so. I do think that I desire a connection with people, I'm just more conflicted in that area than anything. As with Scruffy, I don't think I desire but a few connections and I, personally, am somewhat reluctant. Yet that part of me that desires a strong connection with people is still there. I've realized that SX would cover my fixation with impact/effect while SO seems to be more about status. There's a small but definite difference between those that has made me rethink the sp/so. Actually, I think that sp/sx fits me much better.


----------



## screamofconscious (Oct 15, 2009)

Hulu - Desperate Housewives: Truly Content - Watch the full episode now.

At 10:05 there's a great example of the sexual instinct coming into play by a self-pres first. Notice how she can't "turn off" her first instinct...she focuses on self-pres concerns in an effort to attract this guy she wants. Just as Bree is unable to turn off her primary instinct, neither can anybody else. Also note how she 'peacocks'. She's using her skills, drawing attention to herself in order to score her guy. Her attempt would likely fail with someone who is self-pres last if his girlfriend had stayed out of the picture.

When determining your own instinctive stacking, start paying attention to the things you tend to talk about with others. Relying on memory is only going to encourage focusing on parts of yourself that you idealize. Pay attention to the present. It's not that difficult to figure out what your stacking is, once you start looking at this. It's not going to be an instant "ah-ha". You'll really need to analyze some interactions to figure it out. If you find that you talk about yourself a lot, put extra effort into your appearance, etc, see if you can turn it off. If you can't, you're probably sx first. That can be applied to any of the instincts.


----------



## Dichotomy (Sep 5, 2009)

I think sp/sx fits me best as well, though like Paradigm don't relate to descriptions of sp sixes that much.

I don't actually dislike all socialising - I loved the last three wedding receptions I went to, and joined in with the dancing. But there was a buzz and excitement as well as social bonding however, and without the 'charge' I'd probably have been pretty bored.

I'm probably only saying so last because I have a relatively poor sense of social dynamics - I can't be bothered, and as an egalitarian take a weird pride in not caring.


----------



## Random Ness (Oct 13, 2010)

1.What do you think are the effects of having one of the variants last? i.e. what is the effect of being sp, so or sx last?

I think it means you resort to that stacking last. It doesn't mean you don't use it, though. For example, I have sx last, but I still crave deep connections with people. Being sp/so before sx just means it takes longer for me to form a deep connection with someone.


----------



## HandiAce (Nov 27, 2009)

Random Ness said:


> 1.What do you think are the effects of having one of the variants last? i.e. what is the effect of being sp, so or sx last?
> 
> I think it means you resort to that stacking last. It doesn't mean you don't use it, though. For example, I have sx last, but I still crave deep connections with people. Being sp/so before sx just means it takes longer for me to form a deep connection with someone.


I like that. As one with So last, I seek out a group when I have no connection. When I am in a group, I see individuals. I also see targets. But usually, I never take the initiative because I just can't. I usually have nothing important to say.

I am totally Sx dominant because everything I talk about always relates to me and my interests. Maybe it is a bad attention span, but if I can't relate to a topic with my experiences and ideas, I can't contribute. 

It's difficult to pinpoint a person's enneagram and stacking variant together in my opinion. I type myself as a 9, but I am rather self-conscious as well. I appear very calm to people, but also have periods of intense feelings. Sometimes the impulses get the better of me and I pound my fist against the table in frustration or I spring into action doing... whatever. Perhaps making myself look more attractive is part of growth as a 9, the drive to success.


----------



## susurration (Oct 22, 2009)

HandiAce said:


> I like that. As one with So last, I seek out a group when I have no connection. When I am in a group, I see individuals. I also see targets. But usually, I never take the initiative because I just can't. I usually have nothing important to say.
> 
> I am totally Sx dominant because everything I talk about always relates to me and my interests. Maybe it is a bad attention span, but if I can't relate to a topic with my experiences and ideas, I can't contribute.
> 
> It's difficult to pinpoint a person's enneagram and stacking variant together in my opinion. I type myself as a 9, but I am rather self-conscious as well. I appear very calm to people, but also have periods of intense feelings. Sometimes the impulses get the better of me and I pound my fist against the table in frustration or I spring into action doing... whatever. Perhaps making myself look more attractive is part of growth as a 9, the drive to success.


I once thought of it in terms of targets, but then it sounded a little creepy to me. But I am kind of creepy, so it figures :tongue:. I kind of lay dormant watching people... just waiting. I kind of like the chase. The build up. Then suddenly I come out of nowhere... and they ask me why I like them, and i'm like... because of your energy. There's something about them... It's hard to describe. 
If there's no one who i'm at least a little attracted to their energy, I find myself becoming bored by the group and I end up leaving. There has to be at least one person who gives me the right 'vibes'. 

I like your first sentence overall. I find myself trying to look for groups of like minded people, thinking i'm there for the group, but it's not really. It's because I lack the connection. Needless to say, the group never gives me the connection I want. And i'm not completely satisfied.
But then if I do get it or I do have it, the desire to be amongst a group... and the whole damn world all just disappear. 

What kind of things cause intense feelings in you, and how do you go about dealing with them as a nine? (apart from what you've already mentioned). And I think your last assessment is probably fairly true.


----------



## HandiAce (Nov 27, 2009)

Nova said:


> What kind of things cause intense feelings in you, and how do you go about dealing with them as a nine? (apart from what you've already mentioned). And I think your last assessment is probably fairly true.


Simply a physical attraction. But what I feel rather is a sinking of the heart because I have no connection with her.

I just frown and figuratively or literally walk away. I suppose there is a fear of rejection but more so her being suspicious of me.


----------



## Neon Knight (Aug 11, 2010)

screamofconscious said:


> Ever have a stranger tell you their life story? They were probably sx first. Did it make you feel uncomfortable or strike you as very odd? You're probably not sx first. I'm sp/sx. I don't usually get uncomfortable with the life story so much as annoyed if I happen to not be interested...but I'm usually very polite about it since it occurs to me that the other probably just needs a friend or is very lonely.


Damn so that's why I do that? I hope no one thinks I'm too weird, I'm just too open and have diarrhoea of the mouth that's all. The last sentence is what I think people are thinking and I think they are right a lot of the time, otherwise it's probably social anxiety that makes my mouth run the way it does. At least that's what I was told.
<<sx-sp


----------



## perennialurker (Oct 1, 2009)

I am a 5 and definitely sx, and I can say that I am very cautious about relationships, usually very difficult to open up to others, but I am obsessed with the idea of intense, intimate, psychological connection with the right person. There is a great deal of variance among variants given MBTI, enneagram, culture, and many other factors, but I believe that at our core sxs' defining trait is our preeminent desire for that personal connection. This does not mean we are chummy with everyone or that we wear our hearts on our sleeves. It simply means that in our heart of hearts, this is what we want most, no matter how good we are at showing or hiding this.


----------



## Ekeh Mayu (Jun 1, 2010)

Instinctual Variant's can be seen separate and connected to the Enneagram. So like finding your basic Enneagram type before wing, it's best to understand your preference before stacking.

I wanted to add to this because I think the instinctual variants are really simple. There's several problems in comparing the Enneagram and Instinctual subtypes too. But I think the definitions of Enneagram type's aren't adjectives, flat, descriptions but a processes that can aid or hinder.

One problem i've seen is I believe instinctual variants are much easier to spot in reality, whereas they're more veiled over the internet. Sure over the internet you can give a self-analysis, but it's not your instincts playing out in the moment.

Excuse me for not quoting but there was an Sx 8 that described the dressing style of a simple elegance. Not only can I relate with infatuation to that style, but I think it illustrates a point! Your pimary instinct is something that Dominates, you're unaware of it. I don't think a person want's to talk about the dom instinct as instead live it.
So capturing your primary instinct is simple yet subtle, as you will have a bias toward how it plays out. For example, one of my teacher's (Sx) asked his friend who her stylist was? She shrugged it off, not sure what he was talking about. He asked her again to get a similar answer. Then one day, he said, "cut the bullshit, something is happening behind the curtains here." She responded saying she prepared it herself.
Make sense? She assumed everyone took their time to look nice as she did effortlessly for herself.

You can watch any animal show and point out the instincts. I think it's better for your to identify and define instincts for your self; however we each have instinct bias. Instincts play unconsciously, and usually instantanioisly. Hence why you could probably point out your instincts based on one interaction (but the internet isn't always as instantaneous (not forums))

I don't like how people only put up their first two instincts, as it doesn't flow with first, second, and third. Each has a function.
1) Dominant/Preference (You may not see this played out as well as other's may. An objective opinion may be necessary. Unconscious preoccupation.)
2) Neutral
3) Shadow (May not be the same Jungian Shadow in exact. But!!! You'll typically act immature when forced to use this. Added, I think it drains more energy to use it.)
However these are also all three human needs that we usually seek fulfillment in.
(Sort of like Jung's goal for one to find balance with MBTI types, I think the ideal of the functions is to find balance in use with all of these. So, there's going to be people that may use all of these (healthy) and other's that neglect all of them.)

As for an example of instinct shadow, my teacher (Sp last), uses a rental car service. And this time had a Prius, not knowing how to start the car. So he sat inside freaking out, as he was about the miss class. Instead of solving, he freaked out. Wondering if he could (use other instincts) call a friend, ask someone in the street for help. However an Sp may just have opened the side box for a manual, which was there. (And learned that the Prius has a a button to start the hybrid.)
One problem I have seen and unable to yet differentiate is the difference between an unfulfilled dom instinct vs a shadow instinct; however, while they both may seem unhealthy, in process, I think an unhealthy dom instinct will be put in hyper focus whereas a shadow may be ignored completely (until the dynamics of other people may force the use of one.)

Some additional notes is that some couples will actually befriend a person of their shadow instinct as a sort of fulfillment to them.
And you will probably relate better to a person of similar instinctual stacking then a person of the same Enneagram type.

My favorite way to show the instincts in humans is by the model, if you go into a party, where are you attracted to. Any situation will do if it can encompass all three instincts.
We actually went around the classroom to observe the instincts. Most the Sp firsts were the one's that asked about the room temperature, can you change the cooling, close the door to outside, lighting etc... (Whereas an Sp last business associate of my dad's was once having a conversation stuffing party peanuts in his mouth whilst conversing. At one poiny, he started choking, and deciding to make a solution by stuffing more party peanuts in his mouth.)
The people Sp first were also the first to use a pillow to place under their seats. They typically brought food, water (and snacks).
I think Sp was the easiest to see. There was no Soc's in the classroom though;
However in a party, an Sx will typically be attracted to where the energy is, whereas an Soc would to where the power dynamics are. I don't think so much that number's matter so much to instincts. An Sp doesn't care as long as it's comfortable. An Sx can be with seven people if they can all add to the dynamics of energy (usually doesn't). I'm not entirely sure of Soc, as I think in some part quantity is important to a Soc to add to create a hierarchy.

To continue with dynamic playouts, we can try clothing. An Sp will wear clothing for comfort, an Sx will wear clothing to attract or provoke, whereas a Soc may wear clothing for status or to fit in.
Another example my teacher had between him (Sx) and his boyfriend (Sp) was eating dinner out. When they sit down, he looks at his friend, while his friend looks at the menu. (Now if someone challenged him on looking at the menu is an Sp thing, he may shrug it off thinking, doesn't everyone? AND the Answer isn't black or white, but you can see the dynamics)
The attraction you have as your instinctual variant will be natural. Like most Sp's in the classroom did sensual things, like house design, knitting, arts (in crafts). A lot of Soc's dominant will be attracted to politics. Now added, having a dominant instinct I think also make's your preference in that area sensitive.
Like the Sx 8 distaste toward one that spent too much time dressing. Or for me, I have a dislike toward people that act immaturely about sex.

There are quite a few dynamics that play out when you integrate the instinctual variants back to the Enneagram. I've noticed as an Sx 9 that allowing myself to become elated can hurt feelings, so I turn my instincts off a lot. But I think for Sx 3 that they may play the masculine/feminine stereotypical roles, whereas each Sx Enneatype will use it a different way. (I don't like how the Enneagram has labeled certain types. I don't think Sx's are rambunctous teenager's. I think introversion/extroversion follows more of a quality/quantity in energy. Where the stimulation level may require more or less to be ideal.)
But again, an Sp I don't think is more introverted, that's not their focus. However typically a group of 100 people isn't comfortable. But in another sense a So+Sp may be a introvert tribal, that wants to be a part of the beehive, but in the background.)
/end mini rant

As i've possibly overwritten at some parts, to see the instincts individually, I want to remain simple. It's about their focus or process.
And here also comes, if you are evaluating yourself, the time to be honest with yourself. Take a deep breath.

(Would it be easier if I just contained a separate misconceptions section?)

Here's the note's i've taken:

Self-Preservation (SP):
How am I? How will I survive?
Warm energy
Nesting Orientation. Conserve (food, safety, protection, energy). Hunter/Gather.
Am I going to be okay?

Sexual (Sx):
Who am I to you?
Hot/Heat energy
Transmitting Genes/Memes. Intensely transmitting to other. Attracting/Bonding, pair bonding.
Divide world by favorites, Me & you against world
Attract/Provoke, Over or Underpower

Social (So):
Who am I to the group? Who am I with?
Cool energy
Impersonal decisions (but not uncaring)
Not between but amongst (blending in)
Think politically. Interested in group dynamics. Information traficking.
3 or more.
Know about systems and workings (know it unconsciously), willing to sacrifice for group/system.
Safety & security in numbers, recognition/status.


I'm also going to include some website's with information I thought was thought provoking:


> These three instincts are built into our bestial nature, which resides at an unconscious level helping to ensure our survival, both of ourselves and our species. From the perspective of the enneagram, we want to know how these drives appear and function, both within personality and as distinct patterns, as defined by each instinct alone or the alignment of two or three (stacking).
> 
> Sexuals attract others without really trying. They also repel others in the same way, like an anti-pheromone. This works like a screening function in the mating process. People typically have a strong reaction one way or another towards Sx's, and vice versa.
> 
> ...


http://www.ocean-moonshine.net/e142...er_op=view_page&PAGE_id=42&MMN_position=80:80
(This site also has the stacking's; HOWEVER, PLEASE try to find your preference before playing the relation game on 'stacking types'. This is a trap i've fallen into.)\





> These Instincts mean the following:
> The Self-Preservation Instinct in General
> Most people can easily identify this Instinctual Variant. Self-Preservation types are preoccupied with getting and maintaining physical safety and comfort, which often translates into concerns about food, clothing, money, housing, and physical health. These issues are their main priority, and in pursuing them, other areas of their lives may suffer.
> 
> ...


Enneagram Institute

Now i've also received a one-worded description for each subtype + Enneatype combination. It's for your interpretation on whether it helps.

It'll be in SP first, Sx second (Intimate), and Social (Group) third.. You'll see.

1: Anxiety (Worry) (SP), Jealousy (Sx), Nonadaptability (So)
2: Me First (Privelege), Aggression/Seduction, Ambition
3: Security, Masculine/Feminine Image, Prestige
4: Dauntless (Reckless) (SP), Competition (Sx), Shame (So)
5: Castle (Home), Confidence, Totems
6: Affection (Warmth), Strength/Beauty, Duty
7: Family Defender (SP), Suggestible (Sx), Sacrificial
8: Satisfactory Survival, Possessive/Surrendering, Seeking Friendship
9: Appetite, Union, Participation
(Based on this, I would like to emphasize again, that each instinctual variant has a focus. Unless healthy and balanced, you can possibly only describe your own preferences)


The best way's to find your instinctual variants are to go out and make one interaction to take observance of. If you're too lazy to go out, then perhaps writing down all your interest's (unaware of mentally playing cause/effect). And evaluate later how that fits.
Your instinctual preference's won't change every day.

P.S. I think there are many enigmatic types (So 5, Sx 9, Sp 2... You decide) And I do wonder if this leads to complexities within the type. Sort of like putting the counter in a phobic 6


----------



## Pyroscope (Apr 8, 2010)

How do you think SX first would manifest in introverts?
I find the description of SX last a little off somehow. I don't see why an SX-dom person couldn't feel distant from their friends and family if they weren't getting the connection they desired.
I'm curious about the dynamics of SX and SO. Could a person with those have both the SX strong avoidance but it being tempered by SO reminding them that they have obligations to a group?
I oddly found myself relating to both the SX first and SX las  I can be dysfunctional in my attitudes and strongly avoidant if something doesn't feel like a strong enough connection, but I generally don't feel strong connections in any of my friendships, though I sometimes wonder if it's a defence-mechanism, since I usually feel that I'm not that important to others.
Couldn't relate much to the SP description, I'm very neglectful to my daily life (university has been a big shock for that... I eat some pretty crazy stuff because it doesn't occur to me to replenish my supplies and I think my shower's been blocked half the time I've been here because I just didn't care enough to do anything about it)
SO was interesting because I felt quite in the middle about it. I'm not that aware of the 'power dynamics' and I'd been more interested in the 'passionate' group somewhere than the socially stronger group or however it was described
About all I can tell from this is definitely not SP-dom!


----------



## Teardrop (Sep 23, 2010)

Pyroscope said:


> How do you think SX first would manifest in introverts?


I'm 70% introverted and all 9 ennegram types active in me are sexual variants besides 3. I'm extremely aware and concerned about how people perceive me and how my relationships are going. Although I'm not particularly outgoing I stand out, and there are not many people who aren't extremely interested in me and would like an insight into my life. I spend a lot of time alone cultivating my strengths so that I can come across in the best way to people. I'm assertive and go for what I want, but I'm not terribly interested in anyone unless I feel like I could connect with them. I feel uncomfortable in large groups and would prefer to speak to a few people there if possible.


----------



## Pyroscope (Apr 8, 2010)

Teardrop said:


> I'm 70% introverted and all 9 ennegram types active in me are sexual variants besides 3. I'm extremely aware and concerned about how people perceive me and how my relationships are going. Although I'm not particularly outgoing I stand out, and there are not many people who aren't extremely interested in me and would like an insight into my life. I spend a lot of time alone cultivating my strengths so that I can come across in the best way to people. I'm assertive and go for what I want, but I'm not terribly interested in anyone unless I feel like I could connect with them. I feel uncomfortable in large groups and would prefer to speak to a few people there if possible.


 That sounds a lot like how I used to analyse everything about my connections, I was and still am not sure about them and worry a lot about how they're going, but I guess I probably don't *know* so well how they're going like you talk about and I guess if I'm pretty bad making connections then sx first is out of the question... Blah, I don't understand. Sometimes there are some people that something feels different about them and I want to connect with them more than others but it doesn't seem to work out...
Wait, isn't being concerned about how others view you and being aware actually signs of a social variant? Or am I remembering wrong..?


----------



## pinkrasputin (Apr 13, 2009)

Sorry guys. I just had to kick this thread back up. I never saw it and it had some good info.



TreeBob said:


> I won't say you are wrong and if you can find me a good description then I will look at it. I know I am more SX/SP compared to SX/SO. Keep in mind this was written for a 8w7:


@TreeBob I don't know if you went ahead and settled on your variant stacking but I want to quote what Scream bolded before. 



screamofconscious said:


> Some who teach the subtypes try to get around this discomfort by labeling this subtype as
> the “intimacy” or “one-to-one” subtype, and this is where the problem begins (though I use
> the word “intimacy” in training programs). This instinct is not about platonic bonding with
> another;* this instinct is about attracting and mating with another.*
> ...



I just want to pipe in and here at say that I find I'm WAY more "me, me, me " than you. I find you to be way more reserved. I was just wondering if in fact you can see the difference and if you actually relate to any of the above? Because when I read it, I felt like the SX poster child . (See? I just had to include a statement about _me_ again. lolz). Sorry.


----------



## TreeBob (Oct 11, 2008)

pinkrasputin said:


> Sorry guys. I just had to kick this thread back up. I never saw it and it had some good info.


ok so you are sx poster child. Just because you are MORE sx then I am doesn't mean I am not. I read what she had to say as well as other descriptions on the net. I am sx. I do like one on one relations but that is more due to my 8 w7 then my sx.


----------



## Neon Knight (Aug 11, 2010)

pinkrasputin said:


> I felt like the SX poster child . (See? I just had to include a statement about _me_ again. lolz). Sorry.


Reading the stackings definitions made me feel almost like the poster child for 7 sx-sp, do you relate to sx in general or the 6 sx-?

(Me too! me too!) :tongue:


----------



## sodden (Jul 20, 2009)

I can't remember which post it was, but I found what's been written about sexual to be very illuminating. As a 4w5 sexual dominant (unsure about the rest), I feel sometimes like one big enigma. If I don't feel a connection with someone (which is most people), you cannot get a word out of me. If I feel an intense connection with someone, you cannot get me to shut the hell up. And I will be ridiculously blunt and straightforward, no playful banter for me. If I like you, you will most definitely know it. That's what's so jolting about attraction for me- I tend to be pretty stinking withdrawn, but if I like someone or something, not only do I obsess, I gain superhuman energy and cannot stop talking about my current passion. I can seem very manic. 

Dressing for attention? If I want it, absolutely. But it's like a secret code. I know most people will think I dress oddly. I dress for my target audience, no question about it. And I also dress to discourage. Example: I was dragged to a 70s disco event. I dressed all in black, 70s punk style, and made a bag that said "Disco never lived." Of course no one there was attracted to that. I knew that way I would be safe, not hit on by people I would never be interested in. I wanted the people there to be repulsed by me, just as I was repulsed by them. My social variant friend- dressed in disco. Self-pres friend? He just dressed normally.

Also, sure tip off that I'm a sexual dominant? Listen to me prattle on and on and on about myself. The conversation always comes back to me. I'm trying to work on that, but wow is it hard. More than anything it just makes me not talk at all, because I know it gets... overwhelming. I've lost many friends because of it.

Edit- based on other stuff I went back and read, I'm going to say sx/sp/so for myself


----------



## Neon Knight (Aug 11, 2010)

Damn that sounds a lot like me too 2nd paragraph and on. Must be a 4 sx-sp thing.


----------



## susurration (Oct 22, 2009)

brainheart said:


> I can't remember which post it was, but I found what's been written about sexual to be very illuminating. As a 4w5 sexual dominant (unsure about the rest), I feel sometimes like one big enigma. *If I don't feel a connection with someone (which is most people), you cannot get a word out of me*. If I feel an intense connection with someone, *you cannot get me to shut the hell up*. And I will be ridiculously blunt and straightforward, no playful banter for me.* If I like you, you will most definitely know it*. That's what's so jolting about attraction for me- I tend to be pretty stinking withdrawn, but if I like someone or something, not only do I obsess, I gain superhuman *energ*y and cannot stop talking about my current passion. I can seem very manic.


I definitely relate to this. I just realised how much I complicate relationships by setting the bar so high. I would rather have the connection I want than one I don't want. I cut people out incredibly easily, even if we're just friends :\ 

I have a question; Any other sp/sx or sx/sp's end up feeling frustrated with so firsts? :\ I think at this point in my life, I really can't deal with so/sp sp/so people who I'm trying to pursue. Dammit, it just doesn't work. They want light, breezy relationships... and here's me wanting more.


----------



## sodden (Jul 20, 2009)

Yeah, I'm realizing now who the sx/sos are that I know and they are way more chatty. I would never babble about myself to someone on a bus, but the sx/sos... I could for sure see it. The SP second brings some reservedness and caution. I definitely talk more than my sp/sx friends, but less than the sx/sos.


----------



## sodden (Jul 20, 2009)

Nova said:


> I definitely relate to this. I just realised how much I complicate relationships by setting the bar so high. I would rather have the connection I want than one I don't want. I cut people out incredibly easily, even if we're just friends :\
> 
> I have a question; Any other sp/sx or sx/sp's end up feeling frustrated with so firsts? :\ I think at this point in my life, I really can't deal with so/sp sp/so people who I'm trying to pursue. Dammit, it just doesn't work. They want light, breezy relationships... and here's me wanting more.



So you're an sp/sx? It seems to me sp firsts are far more likely to cut people out of their lives without hesitation. I mean, I will cut people out, but it's rare. Usually either I know whether I like someone or not instantly, so if the feeling isn't there right off the bat, I won't even talk to the person. SPs seem like they are more likely to invite someone in, cautiously, assess, and then prune. Which can be hard on someone like me, cause I'm the rose being snipped.

SP/SOs seem to kill me. I mean, they totally slay me. They have their doors locked and I bang and bang and... nothing. SO doms, I seem to deal with better, I guess I'm more likely to accept them for who they are. Someone you have a drink with, chit-chat, see you maybe sometime in six months. Maybe because their true nature seems to be on the surface; they're easy to make out. SP/SOs keep it so hidden.


----------



## susurration (Oct 22, 2009)

brainheart said:


> So you're an sp/sx? It seems to me sp firsts are far more likely to cut people out of their lives without hesitation. I mean, I will cut people out, but it's rare. Usually either I know whether I like someone or not instantly, so if the feeling isn't there right off the bat, I won't even talk to the person. SPs seem like they are more likely to invite someone in, cautiously, assess, and then prune. Which can be hard on someone like me, cause I'm the rose being snipped.
> 
> SP/SOs seem to kill me. I mean, they totally slay me. They have their doors locked and I bang and bang and... nothing. SO doms, I seem to deal with better, I guess I'm more likely to accept them for who they are. Someone you have a drink with, chit-chat, see you maybe sometime in six months. Maybe because their true nature seems to be on the surface; they're easy to make out. SP/SOs keep it so hidden.


Top paragraph; exactly it. I don't cut people off i've established a genuine connection with though. Only people who are acquaintances, or barely friends. Most people who have reached the 'friend' stage, I have no need to cut them out, because I know I like them, and i'm in for the long haul. I may disappear for long periods, but I never forget them. I have several friends I've known for years. It actually really perturbed me to have a friend in highschool, randomly stop talking to myself and our little group for no reason whatsoever. I know it doesn't feel good to be left behind. 

I usually know right away as well. I don't really give people another chance. 

I like sp/so and so/sp as friends. I guess it can be a smoother friendship where it's not punctuated by spikes in energy. If I was in a relationship with a sx of some pursuasion, I would rather have sp/so or so/sp friends. I can't deal with too much energy coming my way.


----------



## Neon Knight (Aug 11, 2010)

I've cut out people before but I was under sever stress and ill at the time and they didn't heed my warnings that I am not available at all times so do not expect me to be, which of course fell on deaf ears and being in the state I was in, I wasn't gonna tolerate it.

Back on earlier subject I haven't typed anyone in basic enneagram in my life let alone stackings. I imagine like usual, I'd be accepting. Just don't stress me out while I'm stressing and it's all good lol.


----------



## susurration (Oct 22, 2009)

Revy2Hand said:


> I've cut out people before but I was under sever stress and ill at the time and they didn't heed my warnings that I am not available at all times so do not expect me to be, which of course fell on deaf ears and being in the state I was in, I wasn't gonna tolerate it.
> 
> Back on earlier subject I haven't typed anyone in basic enneagram in my life let alone stackings. I imagine like usual, I'd be accepting. Just don't stress me out while I'm stressing and it's all good lol.


I'm very much like that under stress too. I percieve people as being more needy than they actually are, just because of the stress that's compounding. I can't tolerate too many people wanting my time. Though I want it to a degree "take me out of my head". This is probably text book sp/sx. Though when I am unavailable, I am unavailable. 

Thing is, I can be slightly demanding when someone is unavailable too (though I try my darnedest not to be). Given I'm so withdrawn, it seems healthy for me to actually want to be with someone. But I forget to remember that under stress I also become unavailable too and it's not fair I try to push someone when they are in that state. I push my sister sometimes and forget how snappy i'd be if someone did that to me. The -right person- though, i'd be ok with it.


----------



## sodden (Jul 20, 2009)

Nova said:


> T Most people who have reached the 'friend' stage, I have no need to cut them out, because I know I like them, and i'm in for the long haul. I may disappear for long periods, but I never forget them. I have several friends I've known for years. It actually really perturbed me to have a friend in highschool, randomly stop talking to myself and our little group for no reason whatsoever. I know it doesn't feel good to be left behind.


How much of this do you think is the instinctual variant, and how much of this do you think has to do with type six issues of loyalty? This is where this stuff gets confusing to me. I mean, people will kind of gradually fade from my life and I will gradually fade from theirs and that's not a big deal. I'm talking the intimate relationship moving to without warning disappearance. (Which of course triggers all sorts of feelings of abandonment in my four self.) That's what I wouldn't do.

I guess what I see with sp dominants, possibly, is more of this avoidance of dramatic confrontation. They need to protect themselves first and foremost, so they avoid the conflict and just make themselves absent. Yeah, I hate unnecessary drama as well, but if it's necessary, I will most certainly dive in.


----------



## screamofconscious (Oct 15, 2009)

SuPERNaUT said:


> Oh that's never been a problem, I guess I wasn't mad enough to look scary like I'm told I do when really really pissed off. Then hopefully they run away like a good little slimebag :laughing: I find it really irritating when they actually acknowledge what they're doing is being overly aggressive...and they just keep doing it anyway! :crazy:



Yeah, I've been told I'm cute when I'm angry. I just say it like it's a cut down and let my disgust show on my face. You know how people automatically wrinkle your nose and their upper lip draws back when they smell something rotten? That's what you gotta do. :laughing:


----------



## Quin Sabe (Jan 26, 2010)

I guess to bring this back on topic a bit. I'm an 9 SX/SP

I can definitely relate to the wanting to attract. It's one the things I strive for, I want to look good, have some status and accomplishments. You know looks, brains, muscle, class the whole nine yards. But I don't show it off, it's like keeping a lambo covered with garage open, it's there if you ask about but otherwise, it's find remaining hidden. I try to build myself to attractive but I also throw down a moat to make sure I know who is getting close or already cares enough to swim. I have the targets thing too, except I call them prospects, lol just people I notice and like to get know better and see if we're compatible. I nothing ever really comes out of it, probably because the moat....lol Even, with friends I'm bit stand offish, almost scared of that SX intensity, cause I don't want to release it. I'm partly afraid it would scare them off or cause harm to me in some way by saying something I shouldn't have. I think a lot of this comes growing up in a conservative SJ family as an ENTP, I'm just now being able to get past that most people won't bite my head off if I don't fit that conservative christian gentleman, non-existent standard. But, trust me, I like connections, I need people, I've just had to kick in SP for awhile. If I don't have a deep connection I turn to writing to just get it out there, poems, blogs, whatever, just to let it out and hope someone reads it and can provide comfort in someone way with a internet barrier between us. It's not something I really do much anymore though but it gets the job done when I'm unhealthy.

Ocean Moonshine's 9 SX/SP stacking


> *
> Sexual/Self-pres*
> 
> 
> ...


What I bolded is the main things that stand out, I love camping, backpacking, mountain biking and want to take up rock climbing and maybe skydiving. I have strong drive to succeed and fear of failure but, I bury that inside most of the time. It manifests it self more inner problem/contradiction/paradox and just a healthy outer view of ambition, when mixed with 9ness. 

I'm not the smoothest at conversing, I have my moments but mostly its kind of forced. I like people, I like getting out and being around them, but not always talking or participating, I can get really quiet, stoic and a bit depressed or sad eyed, very quickly. There's time I just don't/can't talk. But that happens much more with emotional problems. As some were saying something similar with SP kicking in, there's some people you can talk to and some you can't. 

Neediness, I haven't been in a relationship, I can already see where I can be considered needy. If I'm not around someone, I get lonely, depressed, and existential fast. I forget what I know I have and only see what's in front of me. I realized this after thinking to myself the possibility of my being alone forever was quite high get down on myself about it, when less than three weeks before I was propostioned for sex by a girl and realized just how l irrational that thought was. 

Idk, if this helps but it's sort of where I see my instincts coming in at, and validating a description.


----------



## Neon Knight (Aug 11, 2010)

It might also explain the numerous times since I was even quite young I've had guys follow me home literally and some just don't know when to leave...


----------



## etherealuntouaswithin (Dec 7, 2010)

I am wondering,have any of you information as to the so/sx variant?.....


----------



## Liontiger (Jun 2, 2009)

I'm starting to re-think my sp/sx stacking with this new description. I'm realizing that I'm even _more_ "doormat-ty!" If that's not depressing, I don't know what is.



> *Self-pres/Social*
> This subtype is the most self-effacing of type Nine, possibly the least assertive of all the enneagram types.:sad: They can feel as though they have been looked over and passed by. While *they do desire attention and recognition*, with the sexual instinct last in the stacking, *they seldom actively pursue it*. They feel as though it’s just not worth it. This subtype is usually very deliberate and methodical in their speech. *They sometimes get frustrated because they don’t feel that they can say what they really want to say*. They are therefore often very short and concise with their communication, not wanting to provoke any confrontation. But * when given a chance and the time to express themselves, they can be quite talkative*. While self-pres needs are important to this type, the fact that they are essentially Nines, sometimes causes them to put the needs of others before their own. *When under stress, this type is likely to do busy work, anything that distracts them from their problems. *
> 
> In relationships, the self-pres instinct combines with the merging qualities of the Nine to make a person committed and connected strongly in areas of security, home and other practical matters. They merge their environment with their loved ones. On the down side, *this subtype can be passive-aggressive and withdraw under stress, holding back affection.* They could possibly go long periods of time without talking to their spouse directly.


The thing is, I can actually be pretty assertive. But it's never with the people who are close to me and I care about. It's like as soon as you weasel your way into my heart, I give up the reigns and just let you have your way with me...

Though looking up at the description of sexual/self-pres, I can relate to a lot of that too. Grrrr.



etherealuntouaswithin said:


> I am wondering,have any of you information as to the so/sx variant?.....


From ocean-moonshine.net:


> *Social/Sexual*
> 
> This is overall the "lightest" type Four when it comes to social interaction. They are likely to utilize charm and humor. This type is more scattered and can be down right disorganized. They can drift through life always feeling like an outsider, yet they usually have friends. They can alternate from being the life of the party to withdrawing. Intimates will know of their insecurities and dark moody side while acquaintances will see a softer, friendlier side. This subtype’s energy is geared towards people, but they never feel as though they really fit in. They are often quite creative, talented people who have many interests, but they frequently lack the energy to actually accomplish what they would like. They can drift and withdraw very easily. When healthy and with the right support from friends (and perhaps a little push) they tap into their instinctual energy. When they do this, they begin to see how much they can accomplish. A positive connection to others helps them stay focused.


----------



## Vanitas (Dec 13, 2009)

Is it possible to have all three?

The sexual variant dominant is pretty obvious in my case, but the secondary not so much. I identify with both the 3-sx/sp and 3-sx/so. Coult it be that I was an sx/so, then after life happened (there was a period where it.. was necessary to learn survival, pretty much), developed into sx/sp?


----------



## Paradigm (Feb 16, 2010)

Everyone has all three by definition. The variants are listed as two simply as shorthand rather than to suggest a person utilizes only two. 

I've read a theory that variants tend to be more "fluid" than anything else. I don't know much about this, but I imagine it's similar to how, in the MBTI, we use every cognitive function but tend to use our "favorites" more often. Just as we might use Ti a lot one day when it's not our dom, we might use the social instinct more than we usually would.

As for variants changing, I think there's a chance of that happening, but someone with more knowledge should confirm that. I would guess that, if anything, you still retain an SX/SO personality if you had to learn SP characteristics. SP-lasters tend to not have the "grounding" of the others: they could be practical, but they hinge more on outside sources.


----------



## Vanitas (Dec 13, 2009)

I'm pretty sure the other two, either sp/so, are both being fluid and one masks itself as the other. Whether I find being social as a way to survive or being selfish as a way to be accepted more socially.. 



> *sx/sp*
> This is perhaps the most internally conflicted of the stackings, and potentially the most inconsistent in behavior. This may occur as a blockage of the sexual instinct which can be redirected as a more generally brooding and troubled personality. They may isolate themselves for long periods of time before reemerging. They live according to a strictly personal outlook and are not particularly concerned with the approval of others outside of their immediate concern. They seem to be searching for something, the missing piece. If they find a soulmate they will unite without fanfare, forming a secret bond, dealing with formalities as an afterthought. Powerful sexual impulses facing inner resistance may manifest symbolically in the psyche, giving way to soulful interpretations of the unconscious. Under periods of stress severe sexual tensions may manifest as erratic, impulsively destructive behavior. Can seem restless, torn between the comforts of a stable home life and the urge to wander. May be prone to self-medicating.
> Motivation: to know the heart, reconcile inner conflict, form a secure union.
> Familiar roles: the devotee, the seeker, the wanderer
> ...


3, 



> *Sexual/Self-pres*
> This subtype can appear almost Four-like. They can be dramatic and appear introspective, especially with the Four wing. There is an on and off quality to these Threes. They can be very emotional and then become very business like. It’s not uncommon to find this subtype in the arts, especially as actors, singers or performers. The outward sexual energy coupled with the secondary self-pres energy can cause these Threes to focus on projecting an image of themselves to the world. They will seek validation in the area of their persona. This type especially wrestles with the authenticity of the persona/image they create. On the one hand, the image protects the real self, but at the same time they hate the image they project. This subtype is likely to be in a constant state of flux when it comes to the image they project and for this reason, they run the risk of burn-out and disillusionment. They are more prone to depression than the other subtypes.
> 
> When healthier, these Threes begin to trust their intimate relationships, and begin to disentangle the real self from the flux of partial identities they create. They learn that being vulnerable is necessary if they are to get what they really want, which is to reveal the real self and trust that they are lovable even with their flaws.
> ...


----------



## amazingdatagirl (Jun 4, 2010)

INTP. 5w6. Either sx/so or so/sx. sx - I seem to have a tendency to look for that perfect other who will fulfill my life. And I can be sociable when I choose to be. 

This thread attempts to explain instinctual stackings in relation to the enneagram type and wing. Although no one would describe me as "charismatic", the other sx/so attributes are pretty close to the mark.


Marino said:


> They enjoy pushing other's buttons, especially those resistant to their modes of expression.


and this one...


Marino said:


> 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.


Jealousy has never played a part in my relationships/obsessions - does that rule out the sx/so stack?


----------



## aestrivex (Mar 7, 2011)

susurration said:


> 2. Also, what kind of energy do you sense from certain variant stackings from your own perspective? i.e. "so/sx" = light and fluffy, "sp/so" warm but detached, for arguments sake.


as far as i have ever been able to interpret, these types of abridged, metaphorical, single-concept descriptions seem particularly useless. at present, i see myself as most likely a social five, and i think that in certain ways thinking about the variants in this way (and other ways), led me to the think i was sx (though it seems nearly everyone goes through this phase, or perhaps most people are still stuck in it). despite seeing myself as being essentially driven by social concerns, i think that it would be easy to identify my energy with descriptions like "intense" and "polarizing" -- maybe other people who think i'm not a sexual variant wouldn't agree with those words, but i suspect 
they are biased a priori by not thinking i'm sexual and so thinking they couldn't possibly be appropriate.


i think that in general it seems appropriate to consider variants in this way -- not necessarily as something that can be easily identified by thinking of someone as having a "light and fluffy" air or something like that, but by deeply set motivational drives that usually -- and not only in occasional exceptional cases -- transcend this simplistic energy descriptions.


----------



## SuSu (Feb 8, 2010)

Vanitas said:


> Is it possible to have all three?
> 
> The sexual variant dominant is pretty obvious in my case, but the secondary not so much. I identify with both the 3-sx/sp and 3-sx/so. Coult it be that I was an sx/so, then after life happened (there was a period where it.. was necessary to learn survival, pretty much), developed into sx/sp?


Looking at the "motivation" section of the sx/sp vs sx/so could be pretty telling.
sx/sp: to know the heart, reconcile inner conflict, form a secure union.
sx/so: to impact others, question assumptions, challenge convention.

I identified very strongly with the sx/so motivations, and not much at all with the sx/sp ones. This might also have to do with my 8w7 tendency to want to influence and change people..


On different note: I found this enneagram variant stacking concept to be very useful. I used to question my extroversion because I preferred one-on-one interactions to group interactions - even though I *also* enjoyed group interactions. (this was always one of the E/I questions on MBTI tests). Now I think it has more to do with my SX variant.


----------



## unico (Feb 3, 2011)

I love and seek intensity with people in one-on-one or small group interactions, relationships are very important to me, but comfort and safety are even slightly more important to me (I'm sp/sx). I like having a comfortable home nicely decorated, eating my favorite foods, I like to buy things (but especially books), and I worry a lot about finances and how I will be able to take care of myself.


----------



## Tucken (Dec 13, 2009)

In the end I was really SP first. Sp/Sx. Easy mistake when you walk and wander as much as I do... Be careful of stackings, it's easy to be mistaken!


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

I just noticed that I constantly redirect conversations to myself and end up talking about myself a lot. Its not like I'm boasting or something like that but there is a hint of narcissism in it. Why do I do this? I don't get it.

I catch myself in the middle of it and in my mind I go "Oh shit I did it gain...I'm annoying this person now right?"

I'm also struggling with something else. *Independence.* While I prefer to be independent, I have a very strong need to rely on the opinions of others it seems. I am counter-phobic when it comes to authority thou, I tend to not trust anyone in power nor listen to them.

As an introvert while I prefer not to interact much with other people, I like having people around me. Being alone for an extended period of time makes me antsy and if it is too long I can go nuts from frustration. At the same time I don't feel at ease in groups at all, my worst fears manifest in social group situations, mostly because I feel lost and incapable to handle it. Being in a group can be very frightening and makes me really anxious. I can't seem to calm down and trust group dynamics.

Example: the electric company fracks up for some reason and i get a power cut. Within 2 hours if I don't leave the house I'll get really really restless.


----------

