Personality Cafe banner

Sexual 4s - Do you relate to the Chestnut SX 4 description?

1 - 9 of 9 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,044 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
**Please only vote on the poll if you are confident of your instinctual stacking**

There's quite a bit of a debate out there about how accurate CN (ultimately, Naranjo) is about the subtype descriptions. I do see most places use these descriptions as gospel; that is, it is typical for most people to assume these descriptions are correct. Unfortunately the case with anything stemming from psychoanalytical roots in any way, is that it can be incredibly insightful, or it can just be plain wrong.

So I am curious to hear from other SX 4s, specially those that are typically quiet on the forum - do you guys relate to the CN description? Do you think it's off completely, or are there any parts you do relate to. Or is it right on point for you?

I relate perfectly to the Social 4 description, but unfortunately not so much to actually being Social first. I am certainly not aggressive (as most SX 4s are described to be). In fact, I fit the description of 469s very well, and they are usually described as gentle, ethereal, soft, doubtful, etc. which are all me.

I have trouble directly talking about my neurosis around the SX instinct, but suffice it to say that almost all of my most intense issues stem from this instinct. I have tried to subdue or banish my SX instinct, because I have hated myself. Again, I don't know if I can go deeper into this, because it terrifies me and represents my worst fear. Hence probably why my secondary instinct appears so strong, I don't know.

If I tried to go through the CN description, I will end up striking everything out, pretty much. None of that is remotely me. However, I will grant her this: I do struggle with truly feeling and processing my shame around SX issues. Everything else, I can talk easily about. But to truly feel and lament my shame around SX issues - it's not happening. I can't face that feeling, it's too much. I suppress it and deny it. I do not however, compete with the guy I am attracted to. I will compete with others who are also vying for his affection. I am not at all competitive in any other scenario. I don't care about success, and all of that sounds very 3-ish. I am however, more and more certain I am Sexual first instead of Social.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,055 Posts
@TheDarknessInTheSnow I can see that you voted on this poll. Do you consider yourself sexual first instead of sexual last now?

EDITED TO ADD: @Rose for a Heart Honestly, if it were up to me, I'd have the chestnut description removed from the forum. It's misleading and violent. And it seems that people are using it as an excuse to label sexual 4s as bad by nature and treat them as such.
 

·
Registered
INFJ 4w5
Joined
·
3,696 Posts
I'm not a Sexual 4, so I can't comment on the accuracy of the description, but I do find Chestnut's description of Self-Pres 4 the most relatable instinct description I've come across yet, and it's partly why I type myself as sp/so. Though, I also relate to parts of the Social 4 description of hers, as well. I understand your confusion in a way, because whenever I come across most other descriptions of Sp-4s saying they're reckless (I mean, how can you be concerned about self-preservation and be reckless? :confused:), I can't really relate to that take on the type at all, so it's hard to say who's right when so many of the descriptions of the instinctual subtypes seem to conflict with one another.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rose for a Heart

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,044 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
(I mean, how can you be concerned about self-preservation and be reckless? :confused:)
I take that to be about the anti-(instinct) that every instinct has. It's a sort of fighting against what the instinct perceives as worthy, I suppose. So in that context, it does make sense to me. Have you heard of the +/- identifications with the instincts?
 

·
Registered
INFJ 4w5
Joined
·
3,696 Posts
I take that to be about the anti-(instinct) that every instinct has. It's a sort of fighting against what the instinct perceives as worthy, I suppose. So in that context, it does make sense to me. Have you heard of the +/- identifications with the instincts?
Yeah, I watched a video where Katherine Fauvre talked about how you can be positively or negatively identified with your instinct. It was the first time I was hearing about it, so I'm not familiar with how it works all that much. Do you have a link on it? Yeah, as far as sp-4s being "reckless", I don't think they mean here it's a negative identification, but rather the core of the subtype, according to some authors. That's how it's described regardless of the +/- identification, which I don't think these authors even take into account. In some ways, I am careless about taking care of myself (which almost makes me think I'm sp-last instead), but I've never actively been a reckless person. I remember reading an excerpt from Fauvres who actually attribute recklessness to sx-4s because of the attraction to intensity, so again, who even knows? I don't think I'd be able to find this article now, though. Sorry, I don't mean to turn this thread into discussing sp-4s.

Ah, thanks Google! :surprise:https://www.facebook.com/Katherinefauvreconsulting/posts/1456833187970665
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rose for a Heart

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,044 Posts
Discussion Starter #6 (Edited)
Yeah, I watched a video where Katherine Fauvre talked about how you can be positively or negatively identified with your instinct. It was the first time I was hearing about it, so I'm not familiar with how it works all that much. Do you have a link on it?
Yeah, found it here:

+Positive and -Negative Identifications within your Instinctual StackingThe manner in which we experience the nurture aspect of our instinctual stacking nature is very revealing. Our positive and/or negative identifications with each type in our instinctual stacking greatly influence the way we express or repress our instinctual types.


+Positive and -Negative Identifications Within Your Instinctual Stacking
We may be positively or negatively identified with each of the instinctual types in our instinctual stacking. For example, you could be a sexual/self-preserving/social aka sx/sp/so stacking but have:
- Sexual
+ Self-preserving
+ Social
How well we negotiated the realms of self-preservation (security, nurturance, comfort, physical well-being), social (groups others, friends and foes) and sexual (pair bonds, intimate attachments, closeness, desirability) can dramatically influence our identification with each of the instinctual types in our instinctual stacking.


If we are positively identified with an instinctual type we feel greater confidence and comfort with it. One important point of interest is what happens when you are positively identified with the last instinctual type in your instinctual stacking. In this case, our third instinctual type still needs to mature and become more balanced and a part of our decision-making processes but it does not cause the same level of anxiety as the third type, with a negative identification. As such, it is easier to develop it than when we have a positive identification with the last instinctual type in our stacking.


This identification can most easily be seen in the dominant instinctual type.
A few examples…


Sexual/Intimate
Both positively and negatively identified sexual instinctual types long for their favorite, their beloved and the object of their desire whether a life partner or a lifelong friend.


The positively identified sexual instinctual type was told that they were attractive and desirable as a child by those that were close to them and often by those in their larger groups such as with their extended family, and with schoolmates and teachers. They grew up hearing things such as “You are so handsome or you are so beautiful!” “Aren’t you adorable!” “Aren’t you charming.” Most importantly, they felt that they had the ability to attract the one they most desired to have a close connection with.


The negatively identified sexual instinctual types felt that they were not desirable or not the right kind of desirable to draw in “the one” they most wanted to be close to. This is not about popularity but rather about being and having your ‘favorite; above all else. It is about being in sync and have the union, fusion, and closeness with the object of your desire, the one with whom you have exciting chemistry. The negatively identified sexual instinctual type either gives up trying or learns the tricks of the trade by adorning themselves and seducing the object of their desire with sparking conversations that includes the revealing of one’s deepest and innermost thoughts and the sharing of secrets.


An interesting point I have noticed when working with the positively identified sexual type is how much they struggle to feel attractive and desirable when they lose what they perceived made them desirable and attractive in the first place. They often feel a lot more stress than the negatively identified sexual instinctual type because they did not have to work as hard to develop the skills needed to attract their desired mate, pair bond or BFF as the negatively identified sexual instinctual type did.


Wherever they go and wherever they are they seek the special someone with whom they can deeply connect share their deeper and innermost thoughts.


Social
Wherever they go and wherever they are they seek a place or position that gives them security through status or belonging. Due to positive experiences as a child, the positively identified social instinctual type sees himself or herself as friendly and often wants to find others and/or groups to join to experience a sense of purpose and belonging. This social instinctual type is most inclined to be philanthropic.


Due to negative experiences as a child, the negatively identified social instinctual type sees himself or herself as somewhat of a loner and often wants to avoid grouping of any kind because he or she feels that others will exclude him or her or that he or she will be cast out. This negatively identified social instinctual type is more inclined to be misanthropic. He or she may report that he or she hates people, parties or groups. They usually do not realize that they are the social instinctual type because they are unaware that their attention is focused on people and what others are doing rather than their resources or their designated favorite.


Self-preserving
With the self-preserving instinct, you can be overly focused on scarcity and not having enough time, energy, or money even if you have a trust fund and don't have to work. Or you can keep track of every penny you spend and worry about expenses but have a serious disease and not monitor it. This can be seen if you eat the wrong foods, fail to exercise according to the needs of your condition, don’t regularly take your medications, and/or do not have the treatments required to manage your health issue, especially when it is a life-threatening concern.


The extreme polar opposite can be seen when the self-preserving instinctual type engages in high-risk activities without being concerned that he or she could be easily injured or have a fatal accident. For example, I have known self-preserving cp6s that are very afraid of flying but engage in extremely dangerous sports. It helps the 6 manage their fear of flying when they learn the statistics of those who perish in an airplane crash and those that crash and burn on a dangerous ski slope.


When someone is positively identified with their self-preserving instinctual type they usually have a sense of abundance. He or she feels that their hard work or the world will provide what he or she need financially and/or physically. However, the positively identified self-preserving instinctual type can identify with not having financial and/or physical needs even if they do have them or should pay better attention to them. ;)


The negatively identified self-preserving instinctual type will feel a sense of lack and that they can never have enough resources, and that the resources they do have could be taken away by some sort of catastrophe. They may bring food with them everywhere they go just in case but they will be inclined to hoard it for fear they might not have enough whereas the positively identified self-preserving instinctual type would be more inclined to share what they have, believing when they need food someone will share with them.
Yeah, as far as sp-4s being "reckless", I don't think they mean here it's a negative identification, but rather the core of the subtype, according to some authors. That's how it's described regardless of the +/- identification, which I don't think these authors even take into account. In some ways, I am careless about taking care of myself (which almost makes me think I'm sp-last instead), but I've never actively been a reckless person. I remember reading an excerpt from Fauvres who actually attribute recklessness to sx-4s because of the attraction to intensity, so again, who even knows? I don't think I'd be able to find this article now, though. Sorry, I don't mean to turn this thread into discussing sp-4s.
Oh, I don't mind. Yeah, I don't know, I can be "reckless" but never in an anti-SP masochistic sense. Only in a genuinely blind-to-SP sense. But again, not reckless in the sense of taking actual physical risks, more just impulsive in little things. Using my in-the-moment feeling to make judgments, example. I guess I don't really relate to the reckless part of it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
984 Posts
@TheDarknessInTheSnow I can see that you voted on this poll. Do you consider yourself sexual first instead of sexual last now?

EDITED TO ADD: @Rose for a Heart Honestly, if it were up to me, I'd have the chestnut description removed from the forum. It's misleading and violent. And it seems that people are using it as an excuse to label sexual 4s as bad by nature and treat them as such.
Opps that was probably a mistake in my attempt to see the results. Unfortunately no, but I would love to be sexual first! That sexual energy is :heart:
 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Top