# What is it like having no Sx in your instinctual stack?



## Stellafera (Jan 19, 2015)

Paradigm said:


> Is it possible this is more an SO/SP thing than an SP/SO thing? (Not to say SP/SO doesn't feel this way, just "less common.") Could correlate to the syn/whatever-flow, if you like that theory.
> 
> I'm just thinking, I can't imagine my mom (6w5 SP/SO, 692) feeling this way, though I guess it's possible. I get the feeling she feels like she can't _do enough_, rather than she feels like she can't _be there_ enough.


I'd wager that the "not being able to relate with/connect to people and being sad about it" aspect is more So/Sp and the "not being able to do/be enough for other people" is more Sp/So (as a failure to provide).


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Paradigm said:


> Is it possible this is more an SO/SP thing than an SP/SO thing? (Not to say SP/SO doesn't feel this way, just "less common.") Could correlate to the syn-/contra-flow, if you like that theory.


It is an interesting observation.
I'd like to geek out on that a little more, however the link I used to find that info is a deadend now.
Do you have a good reference for the flows to point to?

The thoughs you spark on this for me, is that I really can't view the instinct types as static.
They strike me more as conditioned patterns of social adaptation.
If one has a group that supports one, then one will be more So and if not, one will be either Sx/Sp or Sp/Sx.
Of course if one takes that path in ones mind, it doesn't take long to realize that the core is Sp,
and the Sx thing is simply pushing its head forward, because one does not feel satisfied with the connections in ones life.
They have to in some sense be idealized I think.
When I pull idealization in, things start to make even more sense, 
because why do anything else than tend to your own basic needs,
if one don't have an idealized idea that other individuals or groups will help one more.
This does not have to be the case, but as long as one has a cronic idea of this, 
ones instinctual pattern will over time change.
For me it seems that when one start to idealize either other individuals, the group or both,
then one will act accordingly, depending on ones own ability to believe in the benefit.
I think So last and especially Sx last (to stay on topic), 
have lost all faith in the ability of others to provide benefits on that level.

Just had to get that out of my head and into written form xD


----------



## Krayfish (Nov 3, 2015)

Khadroma said:


> This is actually interesting, and I wonder what kind of affect cultures have on this.
> 
> For example, Americans tend to be very "peach" culture-wise, while Germans tend to be more "coconut".
> 
> ...


I have no evidence, but I'm almost certain cultures would have a huge impact on your instinctual stacking. From stereotypes at least, a lot of western european cultures I'd assume would have more sp doms (particularly sp/so) while America would likely have a larger population of so doms. All I know if sp/so is probably one of the most common ones.


----------



## Skeletalz (Feb 21, 2015)

Thats quite a stretch to imagine, I cant think of anything but observations of sx blind people. Boring, dull, ordinary, empty, superficial


----------



## Stellafera (Jan 19, 2015)

Skeletalz said:


> I cant think of anything but observations of sx blind people. Boring, dull, ordinary, empty, superficial


----------



## Skeletalz (Feb 21, 2015)

Stellafera said:


>


Shouldve brought an umbrella


----------



## d e c a d e n t (Apr 21, 2013)

Skeletalz said:


> Shouldve brought an umbrella


yeah that's more Sp


----------



## Skeletalz (Feb 21, 2015)

Distortions said:


> yeah that's more Sp


Its just for *The Look*, I can easily tolerate shit weather for an extended period of time. Its just rain, who cares, right now its so warm that I _probably_ wouldnt get sick.


----------



## d e c a d e n t (Apr 21, 2013)

Skeletalz said:


> Its just for *The Look*, I can easily tolerate shit weather for an extended period of time. Its just rain, who cares, right now its so warm that I _probably_ wouldnt get sick.


:|


----------



## Coburn (Sep 3, 2010)

I find comparisons to a robot distasteful. I've had that term used to dismiss or downright discredit any feelings I had because I didn't put my heart on display in a Fe/sx-approved manner. 

Being sx last, my focus is more on impersonal things. Self improvement, independence, goals, etc. I don't notice a lack of relationships and am not especially affected or bothered by surface-level relationships. I don't mind talking to someone and our conversations never getting past the weather and the weekend. 

This doesn't make me a shallow person anymore than an sp last is shallow for not caring about their financial statements. It's just a matter of where focus lies.

I personally don't perceive relationships to be as important or fundamental to being happy and satisfied with life. 

The only time is does affect me is when it is pointed out and treated as if the lack of focus on relationships is somehow indicative of the fact that I am wrong/broken/fucked up. As in, if only I cared about those things instead, then I would be more "human" or happy.

[redacted]

EDIT: this turned into a bit of a rant about sx doms, which was not the focus of this thread.


----------



## Skeletalz (Feb 21, 2015)

Distortions said:


> :|


Dont worry :wink:, my health is on point, Im sick maybe twice a year at most.


----------



## angelfish (Feb 17, 2011)

I asked sp/so husband about his perspective this morning. He related something like this -- 

He feels strongly, but not intensely. He doesn't really get obsessions that make him single-minded, though he has interests/passions that he is dedicated to, and pursues them near-daily. He is stubborn and strong-minded, but not fiery. He's not an all-or-nothing kind of person - he's steady and reliable. He is also fiercely protective of his ability to be spontaneous and independent in his free time.

In interacting with others, he is generally blunt and straightforward (and, when relaxed/comfortable, tends to be lively and ebullient). He doesn't tend to seek or have intimate conversation - I prod at him to get his deeper feelings out. He says that those are typically hard for him to put into words, and it makes him uncomfortable to do so. (He usually seems pretty miserable if I try to sustain raw-emotional talk with him for any longer than an hour.) At the same time, he has a surprising knack for getting previously-hidden stories out of others by simply asking questions others don't think to ask. He also enjoys engaging in many cultural, political, social, and artistic topics, and knows a surprising amount about them - no one has ever referred to him as shallow. I think it was my sx/sp brother who pointed out that a whole lot seems to lie under the surface with him.

On that note, he doesn't seem to have any personal concern that he is shallow, though he periodically vocalizes fear about missing out on something deeper or more exciting/meaningful in life. He enjoys his job and his free time, but has said a few times, "what if I look back and this is all I ever have done?" (I agree with him - I want us to live abroad soon. He is reluctant and interested by turns.) He also does express desire for a closer relationship with his soc/sp sister. He spends the majority of his non-work time with me - has for years - and we shift between doing parallel independent tasks in a shared space and actively interacting. We have a handful of favorite places we go and things we do, and throw in new ones here and there. He automatically takes care of our home and cars, and says it's just what he does, which I appreciate deeply, since I suck at it (I do clean!), and he says that I provide him with fun and whimsy and fire, which he enjoys but isn't good at creating for himself. (Seems like a shitty trade for him... but he seems happy...)

When I brought it up (he's a 9!) that he seemed to struggle sometimes with feeling adequate, he agreed strongly. I once read that sp is very about "fitness", in the sense of being up to task, and that is definitely an anxiety he faces. Even when he is new, sick, stressed, or otherwise clearly impaired, he is strongly affected by his fear that he will not be [whatever] enough. I don't really understand it because he always seems so clearly capable to me - and the few times he's not, it seems unimportant - but it seems to weigh on him regardless. He has always been more than enough in our relationship except, ironically, when he was so stressed about being good enough that he was shutting himself down.

Anyway, I've heard plenty of criticism about sx-lasts being "dull" or "ordinary"... IMO people who think/say that are ironically being shallow themselves - they just haven't looked deep enough. That sx layer is always there even if it's hidden deep down... no one gets away without _any_ desire, spark, intensity, or merging, just like (miraculously) my sp engages every once in a blue moon. I find it fascinating to dig into it with him every once in a while but I also find it comfortable that he usually keeps it tucked away. High sx makes me more uncomfortable than sx-last... Regardless, sp/so husband and I seem to get along swimmingly so I'm happy that works out.


----------



## Paradigm (Feb 16, 2010)

Skeletalz said:


> Thats quite a stretch to imagine, I cant think of anything but observations of sx blind people. Boring, dull, ordinary, empty, superficial


Don't be a typist jerk. (If you're "just joking," it doesn't come off that way.)



Coburn said:


> I find comparisons to a robot distasteful. I've had that term used to dismiss or downright discredit any feelings I had because I didn't put my heart on display in a Fe/sx-approved manner.


Yeah, I've been called a robot a lot due to the Fe nature of many people around me... and I'm SP/SX. I don't really mind being called a robot in jest, to tell the truth - I really am non-expressive, after all. (And my medical history involves a lot of, for simplification, equipment inside and outside my body, so fuck yeah cyborg status.) But using it as an insult, it's not very cool. Just because I (you/anyone) doesn't react like they do, it's not _wrong_, it's _different_.

I'm not really convinced "shallow" and "robotic" applies to SX-last at all. They're very kind and some are quite self-sacrificing. I understand why they feel that way (I'm comparing it to my depression, which makes me feel separate from people), but I wonder if it's more a preoccupation than an actual problem sometimes.


----------



## Daiz (Jan 4, 2017)

I don't really understand this instinctual variants stuff - I kind of wandered in here because the MBTI forum was boring tonight so maybe what I say will be irrelevant. Still, I've scored so/sp on a test before. 

I care about people strongly and feel things very intensely. I get very stressed over strangers and their problems. I'm lonely, I want to have close friends and can feel quite attached to someone but the moment they start wanting to hang out more, or I sense them starting to get attached to me in return, I get repulsed and start giving them the cold shoulder.


----------



## d e c a d e n t (Apr 21, 2013)

Red Magician said:


> It is an interesting observation.
> I'd like to geek out on that a little more, however the link I used to find that info is a deadend now.
> Do you have a good reference for the flows to point to?
> 
> ...


If you think like that, maybe you're Sp-first. It seems rather common to take your first instinct for granted as something that's like... why wouldn't anyone be focused on this?


----------



## minikat313 (Mar 9, 2017)

vhaydenlv said:


> I need my personal space, I'm very independent and I try to stay focused on my goals and my interests.
> 
> ...but I'm not the type of person that's gonna make the first move or chase after them.


I can relate to this even though I'm SX first, especially about focusing on goals and interests. I do often make the first move with people, but I feel like it's kinda frowned upon in my culture which discourages it a bit in me... :/ It's weird because I don't like when people are clingy/depend on me too much, but I enjoy being clingy with others as long as they're people I feel a connection with.

My SP/SO sister and 4w3 SO/SP mother like socializing, but are not really fans of deep connection/attatchment and are suuuper independent and private. They are definitely more focused on their own interests and personal lives.


----------



## vhaydenlv (May 3, 2017)

minikat313 said:


> I can relate to this even though I'm SX first, especially about focusing on goals and interests. I do often make the first move with people, but I feel like it's kinda frowned upon in my culture which discourages it a bit in me... :/ It's weird because I don't like when people are clingy/depend on me too much, but I enjoy being clingy with others as long as they're people I feel a connection with.
> 
> My SP/SO sister and 4w3 SO/SP mother like socializing, but are not really fans of deep connection/attatchment and are suuuper independent and private. They are definitely more focused on their own interests and personal lives.


I like connections and being attached to people but I'm going to school right now and... I'm that person who's just gonna ignore everyone and eat their dinner in a classroom... I'm picky to say the least.


----------



## anorganizedmess (Oct 31, 2016)

This has been really helpful, thanks dudes


----------



## Jaune (Jul 11, 2013)

I love it. I never feel the need to become close to anyone (and avoid it as much as possible) and I'm dispassionate about almost everything.


----------



## Eren Jaegerbomb (Nov 13, 2015)

Daiz said:


> I don't really understand this instinctual variants stuff - I kind of wandered in here because the MBTI forum was boring tonight so maybe what I say will be irrelevant. Still, I've scored so/sp on a test before.
> 
> I care about people strongly and feel things very intensely. I get very stressed over strangers and their problems. I'm lonely, I want to have close friends and can feel quite attached to someone but the moment they start wanting to hang out more, or I sense them starting to get attached to me in return, I get repulsed and start giving them the cold shoulder.


Then _how_ do you make close friends? What's your secret?


----------



## Daiz (Jan 4, 2017)

Lemmy said:


> Then _how_ do you make close friends? What's your secret?


I don't.   )))))) (Can you feel the misery and loneliness behind those smilies lmao)

I have an extrovert boyfriend who lives in the US. So here in Australia, I have about 2 friends I'm still in touch with, while over there, thanks to darling bf, I have tons.


----------



## Eren Jaegerbomb (Nov 13, 2015)

Daiz said:


> I don't.   )))))) (Can you feel the misery and loneliness behind those smilies lmao)
> 
> I have an extrovert boyfriend who lives in the US. So here in Australia, I have about 2 friends I'm still in touch with, while over there, thanks to darling bf, I have tons.


Omg another Aussie! That's 3 of us in a row today. xD
Aww... Then.... Maybe... Even if you really get repulsed by people opening up to you, maybe.... Try to let them know you.


----------



## Daiz (Jan 4, 2017)

Lemmy said:


> Omg another Aussie! That's 3 of us in a row today. xD


Ayyyyyye, you're the first known Aussie I've met here!



Lemmy said:


> Aww... Then.... Maybe... Even if you really get repulsed by people opening up to you, maybe.... Try to let them know you.


----------



## pwowq (Aug 7, 2016)

Intimacy is a physical act. Get real.

No one is the definition of "best friend".

(that's what it 'feels' like)

I do feel like I have a massive distance to everyone and everything. I am fine with that. Other people sometimes aren't but that's not my problem, they just have to realize people are different at the core too.



Skeletalz said:


> Thats quite a stretch to imagine, I cant think of anything but observations of sx blind people. Boring, dull, ordinary, empty, superficial


Haha! Funny guy this one.
I care about getting places and getting shit done. Damn boring life, amirite? ^^

I DO for people. I don't think of people. I don't feel for people.


----------



## Eren Jaegerbomb (Nov 13, 2015)

Daiz said:


>


¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I dunno how to help you with that one then... :/

Wait, maybe just make a much of F type "friends" and some T's.


----------



## adumbrate (Feb 13, 2017)

I think Sx-last is mostly happy..in an average kind of happy. Like, no dramas, not too much involvements, not too cold, not too hot.
Everything seems 'okay' and that's it. Most of the time you don't feel strongly enough to like or hate anything.
Sometimes I'm jealous of someone with passions, like totally into something and can put themselves into that 100%.
'I like you but please don't abruptly hug me' -- seems to be a constant monologue.
'I love you but I can't imagine living with you 24/7. I need to get to work.' ---wtf is this? am I in love or what?
'Another workplace romance? Please, I'm here to work, not to find dates'----as if I would find dates anywhere at all. 

- Sometimes I feel like a sentient being with human-like sentimentality.
- Carpe Diem is only true if you have anything to seize, which is, none. 
- Self-help books with "follow your dream" messages feel like an insult.
- Hollywood movies romance is really...really out of your comfort zone.
- Why can't anyone past 15 value friendship anymore?


----------



## Daiz (Jan 4, 2017)

adumbrate said:


> I think Sx-last is mostly happy..in an average kind of happy. Like, no dramas, not too much involvements, not too cold, not too hot.
> Everything seems 'okay' and that's it. Most of the time you don't feel strongly enough to like or hate anything.
> Sometimes I'm jealous of someone with passions, like totally into something and can put themselves into that 100%.
> 'I like you but please don't abruptly hug me' -- seems to be a constant monologue.
> ...


Ok, I can't relate to this. Maybe I'm not Sx-last. I feel pretty strongly about...everything. I also did a 5 Personality Traits test and scored in the 80s or 90s for neuroticism. On the 16personalities test, I get Turbulent every time, rather than Assertive. Does this sound like Sx?

Also, I've posted way too much in this thread so this is the last thing I'll say. >.>


----------



## Paradigm (Feb 16, 2010)

Witch of Caprice said:


> I love it. I never feel the need to become close to anyone (and avoid it as much as possible) and I'm dispassionate about almost everything.





adumbrate said:


> Everything seems 'okay' and that's it. Most of the time you don't feel strongly enough to like or hate anything.
> Sometimes I'm jealous of someone with passions, like totally into something and can put themselves into that 100%.


I'm pretty sure these are more akin to depression, not SX-last. 'Cause... that does _not _sound right.


----------



## Knot in a Tree (Jul 7, 2017)

Daiz said:


> Ok, I can't relate to this. Maybe I'm not Sx-last. I feel pretty strongly about...everything. I also did a 5 Personality Traits test and scored in the 80s or 90s for neuroticism. On the 16personalities test, I get Turbulent every time, rather than Assertive. Does this sound like Sx?
> 
> Also, I've posted way too much in this thread so this is the last thing I'll say. >.>


This sounds a lot like me as well...and I also thought I was sexual last. But I do want have intense passions I want to follow when it comes to a career, and I don't like the idea of compromising (as much as it is the only realistic option). And I know that feeling of everything being just "okay," but I can't stand it. I'd rather be miserable. I do agree with the thing about valuing friendship though, and I'm not nearly as interested in romantic relationships as most people my age.


----------



## anorganizedmess (Oct 31, 2016)

For all the people here who think Sx is only about relationships, what the fuck are you on? It's much more than that. It's about general intensity in life, a zest like no other, strong feelings, convictions, ideas. I don't really care if I have connections with people as much as I care about connecting to what interests me and what keeps me entertained.

(but I do care a lot about how close I am to certain people, I have my "favorites" and to be without them would suck and certainly change me negatively)


----------



## d e c a d e n t (Apr 21, 2013)

anorganizedmess said:


> For all the people here who think Sx is only about relationships, what the fuck are you on? It's much more than that. It's about general intensity in life, a zest like no other, strong feelings, convictions, ideas. I don't really care if I have connections with people as much as I care about connecting to what interests me and what keeps me entertained.
> 
> (but I do care a lot about how close I am to certain people, I have my "favorites" and to be without them would suck and certainly change me negatively)


Does anyone think it's only about relationships, though? Like yeah, some people will talk about relationships and intimacy in the context of Sx, but mainly I see it associated with _intensity_. Although Sx-lasts can be intense as well, so saying it's about that can be misleading. Anyway, I think the connection between intimacy or intensity and Sx is because of how Sx has that "laser focus" and drive to dissolve boundaries in order to merge with the object of desire.


----------



## TheDarknessInTheSnow (May 28, 2016)

It's like...... nothing actually _excites_ you. It's hard to escalate things. Romantic relationships are rarely on your mind. And it kind of feels bereft of youth sometimes. I'd do anything to experience more sexual energy. 

My closest experience to Sx is knowing how it feels like to be a Sp four, which very much seeks deep chaos, risk, pleasure in experiences to feel alive. I imagine a similar dynamic manifests with Sx.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Think I describe my _(SX)-last_ rather well below:



* *





___________ 


(SX) is not a "blindspot," I just find it fairly intimate - impractical; to unleash without much incentive - '_close relationships for the sake of close relationships_', and find fixation on the "group" (social-aspect) of my encounter(s) makes it fairly easier to navigate my atmosphere without the overbearing fixation on "unmet" personal needs. Why get intimate with (X, Y, Z), why should I get 'deep' with a specimen for the sake of it? What have they done (?) Who are they (?) A family/friend (?) Eh, so what? Just another humanoid. And indeed, we can have_ just as much fun_ staying out of each others 'business', I assure you. (SX)-specimens can be _rather phallic_ - inserting themselves into crevices they do not belong, scavaging for food, attempting to caress your thighs open for_ any proof of honey_.


In regards to my (SO) instinct, discussing affairs w/ other specimen(s) would otherwise find "too personal", come for myself rather openly; I can sit with a stranger I find intriguing and discuss anything at all, without this need to get "_deep within their soul,_" which does not particularly interest me - and I suppose this is an "intensity," of it's own, I reckon most specimen(s) find this 'too intense' when I disconnectedly discuss _intense things_ (or things unique to the SX-instinct blunt & openly with anyone - without the '_intense connectivity_' (SX's need) present with ease, which was always something I was critiqued on, "_you can't just go around talking about (X/Y/Z) like that, Cat_," & that it should otherwise be more "tactifully," considered - they tend to lock-up (&) hit the road when I start talking - so much for the '(SX)'-fetishism claimed; and even in this, I see no proximate issue since my (SX) isn't in it, (SX) is a tad too refining for myself; and tedious - (narrowing), I get bored with the same connection(s) & eventually fall off their radar/out of contact, since I have no drive to go deep within their 'personal' relations + form unique sacred bonds without reasons. My (SX)-last manifest(s) not as a "blindspot," but as a functional-unit when the _'proper' _specimen comes along to trigger it, not just any humanoid with multiple capacities for depth & all their capacities and 'deepness' are all being displayed - cool? I suppose. Although, for me, I see all specimen(s) as numerical digits with little differences. And indeed, not much into being 'deciphered / decoded' or coaxed into intimacy that seems unnecessary (in the openness of social-contexts) (re: outside of myself (SP-instinct). 


Stay out of my 'sexual' business; if you will, unless there is some_ unique reason_ why they should be investigating the boxes in my basement, which is stammered around in indecisiveness / uncertainty when questioned why (X)-specimen is even down there, in the first place. A deer frozen in headlights. Just felt like _'checking' out_ my basement, just fancy "shiny" objects in my boxes, eh? It instinctively, just never occurs to myself that we have to_ go deeper than necessary_ - if the interaction is _sufficient, smooth, and great as is_. Not really into sitting down and discussing everyone's Enneagram Chakras (&) having some humanoid palm read into my personal/private dimensions without incentive for getting "insight" into... _what, exactly_? (Assuming the specimen can coherently explain why without it reeking of too much of their own (_self-interests_); not interested in sharing my "personal-self," (SP) to a specimen 'personally' for no real reason whatsoever - but am willing to _participate_ in the realm of humanoid(s) at my_ own discretion_, because things are simply more efficient and easier to focus, when there is no (_sexual-_distractions), if you get gist.

And I suppose, I have no interest whatsoever in forming close, intimate relations with specimen(s) I do not know, even if we have "many things in common," it does not warrant a reason to get _intimate_ per se, as I have "many things in common," with anyone, and from anyone (SO), I can gain more knowledge / utility out of distinct types of humanoids - than fixating on one humanoid. (SP/SO) is simply_ self-care _ - without forgetting about the importance of your (position) within social-sphere. Everything that _you do_, has affects, - on the environment, on other(s) and (SO) is an _awareness of these affects_. My (SO) aims to appease my (SP); if I subscribe to _group dynmanics_ - this keeps them (satisfied) &, from _fucking with me_, when I do not wish to bothered. Room for myself, without being (socially-clueless / alienated) (&) reeking benefits.


Introversion + (SP) induces more than enough "self-intimacy," [which may arise _a need to be cautious of ones needs for onesself_, which requires an attentiveness around the specimens in which I am 'intimate' with - or an attentiveness to the (internalized-structure), and leading with (Ni) of all things supplies any 'lost intensity', regardless, which mimics (SX) well enough], by default - thus, (SX) seems to cause imbalance within myself; to fixate and fetishize things that are _already taken care of_ - the only thing 'left' is perhap(s) getting naked - and (SX) last comes necessary with the right humanoids - and assuming the "majority" are all wrong, I can still find utility in them elsewhere in other social-facets. There is_ no craving_ to explore deep with psychological intimate realms of specimens - and milk all affairs of it's insensity for myself. Seems like a private affair; to be enjoyed in moderation & maintained _than spoiled_ - & any (SX)-exploration should be done only if there are_ good reasons_; and until then - (SO) is simply opportunism. 

A main complaint of specimen(s) close to myself is I am so (SP) - (deterimentally secrative/frugal about privacy), but incredibly open to strangers - at the same time -- which seems [confusing] for most specimen(s), as I _go cold _the moment they attempt scooching closer. I tend to be relaxed around strangers, and "uncomfortable," around one-on-one milking with specimens just because, although, if you introduced (3) other humanoid(s) into the equation, all is fine - the attention is diverted, it is easier to communicate - keep things light, flowing, conflict free. I do not wish to be stuck giving therapy sessions on humanoid(s) I do not really care about. _I am all open_ to humanoids, until the specimen asks for a key to my place and attempts to thrust themselves into my space; this is my domain - and I will not share it without reason - and what "reasons" do you have (?) Humanoids are dime a dozen - abudance mindset; humanoids are everywhere - all functioning relatively similar, with mild uninteresting distinctions. I suppose it is somewhat [frightening] in a sense, it induces a tendency to be (blind) to the utility of "intense," connectivity (and that perhaps, individuals should be considered in more depth - rather than numerical digits), specimen(s) have feels, special passions, important "unqiue 'desires' to be split open (&) raw on the operating table - and I perhaps, slow down and warranted attentiveness to this.

There is not much craving beyond (SP) for myself to form reckless, randomized intimacy just because the specimen has a capacity to do so, well, any humanoid can "_talk about deep things,_" -- darling, does not warrant they are worth _spreading eagle _to. The "_all eggs in one basket approach_," is simply impractical. Cast a wide net and throw out the spoiled fish; and suck what you can from the exchange, all is valuable for moving forward. *No one is unique*, from my (SO)-POV, rather every and all specimens has _unique information to share_ - which is why it interests me more to be (SO-cially aware), than (SX), scrutinzing.

My (SX) instinct is for the specimen(s) that interest me - not simply this strange need to just 'be deep' for the sake of deepness; there is no genuineness here. Just curiosity; nosiness. No genuine desire to "know the humanoid," just a desire to quench their own (deprived) thrist for *intimate details*. Just want to know _the ingredients _ for a cake they are unsure about even (baking) with entirety. _No guinea pigs _ in this kitchen. Remember the basic social etiquette of not _drooling all over the buns_, other specimen(s) have to eat, too - wipe your mouth. _The bakery is closed for business_.


----------

