# Stackings and Relationship Compatibility



## MBTI Enthusiast (Jan 29, 2011)

Hi all,

So I have been thinking about how stackings play into relationship compatibility. I think it is generally accepted* that:

Easiest/best compatibility: Same stacking
2nd easiest/best: Only same first instinct
3rd easiest/best: Only same last instinct

Now, does it help to have the same second stacking? I think it might, because then there is at least SOME agreement on that particular priority in life. So my hypothesis is that:

4th easiest/best: Only same second instinct
Hardest compatibility: All different

What does everyone think? It makes sense to me, but I wonder if anyone has experience that proves/disproves this hypothesis.

*Some of this is supported from this book: http://personalitycafe.com/articles/150265-factors-relationship-compatibility-using-enneagram.html

EDIT: I now think 4th easiest may be "all different" and hardest may be shared second because if two people share the second instinct, it replies that each person's dominant is the other person's blind spot.


----------



## meridannight (Nov 23, 2012)

i agree with the same stacking being of the best compatibility.

i think the 2nd best would be shared last. i get sx/sp-s and sp/sx-s but anybody with an so in their 1st or 2nd position doesn't really match with me at all. it's like trying to mix water with oil. it just won't happen. they are what they are, i am what i am, and we remain two different things not understanding the basic nature of the other one. i don't get them, and they don't get me. in my experience so far, even if there has been some initial interest and attraction, it has all turned cold surprisingly soon due to these fundamental differences in nature.


----------



## kaleidoscope (Jan 19, 2012)

I don't know if instinctual stacking is a basis for compatibility. I've never really been in a romantic relationship with another Sx type, but I've been consistently and extremely attracted to So/Sx. I don't know what it is about that stacking, but it's just incredibly sexy appealing to me. I type as an Sx/So but I am also a 4w3, so I'm nowhere near as socially smooth and apt as the So/Sx types I'm drawn to. I guess part of the attraction for me is seeing them master something that I'm usually clumsy and awkward at. I'm fascinated by how easily they read the dynamics in a situation and how quickly they spot things that I'm oblivious at. I could see an Sx/Sp experiencing the very same fascination, and I don't see why it would take away from the compatibility. 

The most incompatibility I have felt has been with someone whose blind spot was my primary instinct (an Sx-last). I've struggled very much because we clearly didn't have the same needs and priorities. I would be yearning for passion and merging, and they would be preoccupied with others things, and putting aside what mattered to me. Sx-secondary types on the other hand, seem to want and love a lot of intimacy, connection and depth in a relationship, without the burning, craving and the urgency of an Sx-dom. I find that their intensity is often more grounded. It's not their default state (which is more warmth and affection and playfulness - something I absolutely adore) but they welcome it greatly. They can also seem very Sx with that one person that brings it out of them. I get the impression that an Sx-Sx relationship would be very very intense, but also very short-lived. An Sx-primary with an Sx-secondary would be more stable and long lasting, IME. Their Sx coming in second is perfect, not too hot, not too cold. It's _just _right. 

Then again, I'm insanely biased. :kitteh: I'm also a 4 and I enjoy the longing that comes with wanting more and more intensity, and bringing it out of them every single time.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

kaleidoscope said:


> The most incompatibility I have felt has been with someone whose blind spot was my primary instinct (an Sx-last). I've struggled very much because we clearly didn't have the same needs and priorities. I would be yearning for passion and merging, and they would be preoccupied with others things, and putting aside what mattered to me.


I've experienced this same sort of thing (sx-first with an sx-last). One partner is seeking what the other is avoiding. You seek it in the relationship until frustration has you finally giving up and looking elsewhere for it.


----------



## MBTI Enthusiast (Jan 29, 2011)

enneathusiast said:


> I've experienced this same sort of thing (sx-first with an sx-last). One partner is seeking what the other is avoiding. You seek it in the relationship until frustration has you finally giving up and looking elsewhere for it.


You stole my nickname! :tongue:


----------



## MBTI Enthusiast (Jan 29, 2011)

kaleidoscope said:


> Sx-secondary types on the other hand, seem to want and love a lot of intimacy, connection and depth in a relationship, without the burning, craving and the urgency of an Sx-dom. I find that their intensity is often more grounded. It's not their default state (which is more warmth and affection and playfulness - something I absolutely adore) but they welcome it greatly. They can also seem very Sx with that one person that brings it out of them. I get the impression that an Sx-Sx relationship would be very very intense, but also very short-lived. An Sx-primary with an Sx-secondary would be more stable and long lasting, IME. Their Sx coming in second is perfect, not too hot, not too cold. It's _just _right.


Well, I think the other two instincts matter as well with compatibility. So, say you are sx/sp/so, and since you like sx-second in a mate, your choices are sp/sx/so or so/sx/sp. I think the relationship would go well with the sp/sx/so moreso than the so/sx/sp because with the former, you would share a common last instinct (so) which is 3rd easiest, whereas the latter would be all different, and thus hardest. So even though your dominant (sx) would be his secondary, his primary (so) would be your blind spot. It might be an easier relationship for you, but it might be hard on him. So for that reason, for compatibility on both sides, I think there is an order to this for lasting relationship compatibility.



kaleidoscope said:


> The most incompatibility I have felt has been with someone whose blind spot was my primary instinct (an Sx-last). I've struggled very much because we clearly didn't have the same needs and priorities. I would be yearning for passion and merging, and they would be preoccupied with others things, and putting aside what mattered to me.


This is what I'm getting at. People in general probably feel most incompatibility in this situation, BUT if you shared 2nd instincts do you think it would be/was it easier or more harmonious than when you shared no instinct locations?

Thus, if you are sx/sp/so, which is easier/more compatible: sp/so/sx or so/sp/sx?


----------



## Father of Dragons (May 7, 2012)

I consider myself an sx/sp, and my heart kind of skips a beat when I meet an attractive sx/sp lady. I generally feel an instant rapport with any sx - first, but with sx/sp I feel right at home. Sx/so people in general can seem a bit overbearing to me. Sometimes I love it and sometimes I want to hide behind a rock. 
:blushed:

That being said, I have hit it off with so/sx's before. Sp/sx and sx-lasts are hard to connect with for me though. I do think there's something to stacking mattering in dating, but I think the only legit hard rule I would say is that X dominants will be pretty much incompatible with X blind spots.


----------



## MBTI Enthusiast (Jan 29, 2011)

thwoomp said:


> I consider myself an sx/sp, and my heart kind of skips a beat when I meet an attractive sx/sp lady. I generally feel an instant rapport with any sx - first, but with sx/sp I feel right at home. Sx/so people in general can seem a bit overbearing to me. Sometimes I love it and sometimes I want to hide behind a rock.
> :blushed:
> 
> That being said, I have hit it off with so/sx's before. Sp/sx and sx-lasts are hard to connect with for me though. I do think there's something to stacking mattering in dating, but I think the only legit hard rule I would say is that X dominants will be pretty much incompatible with X blind spots.


Yeah, maybe all different is better for compatibility than same second instinct, actually. Because same second implies that each person's dominant is the other's blind spot. At least with all different, one person's dominant is the other's secondary, while the other's dominant is their blind spot. Maybe the second instinct being the same only matters if it's sx, similar to what @Swordsman of Mana said once, if I recall.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

I think flow versus contra-flow play a large role here. I only know one other sx/sp type but we aren't very close at all despite sharing the same mind center fixation and MBTI/sociotype. 

From personal experience, the types I get along with the best seem to be so/sx, sp/sx (though they can frustrate me with how they just sometimes tend to completely defuse the situation) sx/so (but when they run off for another social context leaving me behind is extremely frustrating). I really don't enjoy being around sx blind spot types. I feel there is nothing to talk about when I am with them.

Out of all the instinctual variants, I definitely seem to enjoy being around so/sx the most though. They have the sx connection I seek and complements the blind spot well. They often have a charm and charisma I find very attractive.


----------



## MBTI Enthusiast (Jan 29, 2011)

ephemereality said:


> Out of all the instinctual variants, I definitely seem to enjoy being around so/sx the most though. They have the sx connection I seek and complements the blind spot well. They often have a charm and charisma I find very attractive.


Interesting, so there is some of the "opposites attract" theory in play. However, I wonder how the so/sx would perceive the relationship, being with someone who is so-last. It may be ideal for you, yet suboptimal for them.

Now I wonder if gender stereotypes play in at all (in hetero relationships) or perhaps the objects of relation. (If this applies, maybe it's better if the frustration or rejection partner's dominant is the other partner's secondary, while attachment partners could deal with their dom being their partner's last?) 

Theories, theories!


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

MBTI Enthusiast said:


> Interesting, so there is some of the "opposites attract" theory in play. However, I wonder how the so/sx would perceive the relationship, being with someone who is so-last. * It may be ideal for you, yet suboptimal for them.*


Same logic that you'd apply to people who engage in relationships with their (dis)integration points. I don't think one should entirely view the blind spot as a weakness because similarly, being unconcerned about the social realm could equally be seen as a strength for someone who forms a neurosis around this. Also, in terms of complement I still have sp in my stacking that goes in over-drive when I am around people I wish to become more intimate with.


> *Now I wonder if gender stereotypes play in at all (in hetero relationships) or perhaps the objects of relation. * (If this applies, maybe it's better if the frustration or rejection partner's dominant is the other partner's secondary, while attachment partners could deal with their dom being their partner's last?)


I don't know, since I'm homosexual and have only felt attracted to other men. All I know is that when I spot other so/sx types, I often feel a very strong attraction towards them because they have such outgoing charm and charisma that comes with their instinctual variant. Of course however, other things play a role too such as enneagram core and MBTI. Even if I were to meet an ESFJ 2 so/sx I would probably not want to be friends with that person because I know from past experience that I don't tend to get along with ESFJs and 2s even if this person is an so/sx.


----------



## Asd456 (Jul 25, 2017)

MBTI Enthusiast said:


> Hi all,
> 
> So I have been thinking about how stackings play into relationship compatibility. I think it is generally accepted* that:
> 
> ...


I've been reviving all of the old enneagram threads lately (it's so dead here!) and this topic is interesting. In terms of general relationships, I agree that the first instinct is incompatible to the last instinct. I have a sister that's Sp/So; oh god, talking to her is extremely difficult - she simply doesn't care to establish a deep connection and she moves on from a topic rather quickly, showing little interest in anything requiring an intense focus. She's more concerned about her practical needs and doesn't trouble herself with Sx concerns. I have a close friend that's So/Sx; her warm demeanor is so great and she is the life of the party at any event (she's also an ENFP type 9). She's a social butterfly and I can't think of a single person disliking her; I think the So/Sx stacking is very endearing. I know a few Sx/So types, and their energy is a turnoff to be honest; I find that they love attention, love to be the center of attention, love to be provocative, say things for shock value, etc. (although to be fair, they are ENTPs so could be the Ne). I'm Sx/Sp, and I actually don't know any other person that's Sx/Sp, so I can't comment. I have a family member that's So/Sp; I'm not sure how to describe this stacking. I find that they present a formal appearance like the Sx/Sp, good at social cues but I can't engage in a fulfilling conversation; I end up leaving feeling they lack any depth. Also, they are concerned with So rules and navigating the social politics as well - leaving me feeling completely drained. I like Sp/Sx types, they are reserved but I sense the strong Sx intensity. When we engage in conversation, I find that their Sx is authentic, in that it comes out without reservation. Sx/Sp types are more guarded of their Sx (probably weary of feeling letdown from the lack of Sx connection). Similar to So/Sx, I find the Sx of the Sp/Sx authentic. We have endless conversations, share mutual understanding, passionate about similar interests and hobbies, etc. Their Sx is more focused and intense compared to the Sx of the Sx/So, which is more spread out.


----------



## Sylas (Jul 23, 2016)

From much dating experience:

Same stacking + same stacking subtype is best for compatibility e.g. sp/SO with sp/SO.

Stacking in same flow + same subtype follows next e.g. sp/SO with sx/SP, SX/sp with SO/sx.

Least compatible are stackings with same secondary instinct and different primary ones e.g. sp/so and sx/so. These seem to misunderstand where the other is coming from too often, and their way of life is almost like threatening the mission and the existence of the other.

Other matches fall in between.


----------

