Personality Cafe banner

41 - 60 of 60 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
195 Posts
@Dare I understand now. It sounds somewhat religious and that's why I said to ask.
I have not read the book yet.
but now reading paragraphs from it I will reorient.Not my type at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dare

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
Freakishly accurate. Like someone got in my brain and rooted out my deepest most hidden secrets. It's like the writer knows me better than I know myself.

I'm a female INTJ, 5w4. I was trying to figure out if I'm a sp/sx or an sx/sp, and this really confirmed that I'm the latter.

It seems like all of the above types constitute a weird mix, but the more I read about the various personality theories, the more sense I can make of myself. So interesting!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
217 Posts
I found this a very interesting discussion but I am a bit confused about how certain many of you are about your variant. I have read so different accounts by now of the 5 style in it's variants that I thought from the beginning that the variant area was the least well worked out part of the Enneagram theory. And at the same time I found it very interesting also from the beginning because I realised quickly that it is very hard for myself and people with in my view a self-pres-dominance of any type to take a real interest in each other whereas the self-pres-area in my life is so underdeveloped that I do suffer from it's effect.

Yeah the whole topic is becoming a bit annoying to me because I feel like this area of the theory is built on fluid sand. Is there anybody out there who shares this view with me?

Another point which raised my interest is that more than one person in this thread stated that they were fives that looked a little bit like fours, just of course as it is written in Chestnuts account.

I have read the whole book and my impression was also that it was more a collecting of Enneagram knowledge that was around where she was learning it than that she was able to present any new insights. And over all as a Ph.D. thesis I found her book disappointing in so far as there was nowhere an argumentation for any of the thousands of claims she presents. This might be due to the school of psychoanalysis her teachers originally came from, I dont' know. I have heard people who know a bit about the traditional schools of psychoanalysis but who became disinterested in it because they say that teachers are more talking like gurus in the questionable sense than actually leading an academic discussion. Chestnuts book is very much written in that style at least. When I don't want to say that I didn't read it without no gain at all at the same time.

Last but not least (And maybe I have to open my own thread for that question but for the beginning I want to ask it here): How is it possible to mistaken a four for a five at all?

I (5w4) feel of course a certain cousinhood to people of the four style. But when I meet them their like so much different from me! that after 10, 20, 40 minutes the latest and in a one-on-one situation I can feel that we mutually begin to develop something like an anti-magnetism. Which is from my side due to the fact that I cannot anylonger cope with the fours emotional expressiveness (especially with the three wing) which I don't find necessary to add to any random subject and at the same time makes me very self-conscious of my own strong content focus and brings up self doubt I suppose. When on the other hand I connect very strongly and feel attracted to the 4w5 subtype because of their strong will to be their authentic self (and their beautiful cloths not to forget), but then I must decline their actually very kind offer to form the alliance of the special ones with me, because what's maybe difficult to unerstand for them, as a five I really need to stand alone and have very strong resistance to subject myself to a group-identity.

And I think I have here a lot more behind which I find not only theoretically not very well discussed but I think I take this a bit personal. Because I often come across accounts of the five style which I find oversimplified in so far as they state that fives are not emotional or have no emotions. This would be such a wrong understanding. When indeed fives are on the contrary very thin skinned and impressable and quickly overstrained from their sense-impressions, their interpretations and the emotions that follow them (!) and therefore prefer to live in that somewhat numbed out body most of the time which by definition cannot feel very well because it is somewhat numb.

I'll post this as my first try to get hold of the topics that interest me a lot under the five label. But I feel I am far away still from a thorough understanding of the Enneagram theory as well as my own thoughts and feelings that are at stake here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
Love the overview Chestnut gives. Seems to really resonate with personal experiences, especially lately.

That's one of the reasons, I know I'm a 5 over a 9. Merging is my nightmare. While I want a soulmate, I never ever want to lose me in the process. I'd rather die than ever be merged. That has never been my idea of an ideal relationship. I seek someone who can be separate with me.
That's an interesting way of looking at it. Hadn't considered it that way. For me at least, when thinking about the desire for this, that fear never comes up, because the whole point of the ideal, metaphysical relationship would be that we're so alike that the merging makes you more you, because they're just like you, and vice versa. They won't be 100% the same, of course, but hopefully you will be in the ways that matter, so in the more lenient areas or attributes, your strengths complement and assist in helping with your weaknesses, and you can help each other grow. But merging gives the ability to be fully, truly open with the other... wholly vulnerable, and unafraid of how your feelings or words will be received by them (because no matter how out there, controversial, or strange the perspectives or observation may be, they'd take the time to think them through, after all, the person that they love came up with them so it deserves due thought and consideration... though in this case, they'd be likely to agree, anyway), as well as unafraid of what you'll receive back from the other person, in return. Truly comfortable, happy with mutual transparency, and capable of deep, steadfast trust in that person. The ability to give and receive unconditional love from them, and they love each others bizarre eccentricities.

With merging, there is no "losing oneself" that happens as far as the personality goes, because you aren't merging with someone who's a polar opposite and imposing their opinions, likes, feelings, and other attributes, onto you to accept or change yourself to agree with. Instead, the merge allows for a pleasant co-dependency, with the abundance of similarity on issues and ideals shared, resulting in a preferably effortless relationship of harmony, and agreement. You'd also be merging with someone on par with your level and standards, so the similarities are there, too, in being mutually desired.

But I've always been a fan of, and desired a sort of spiritual/divine collective consciousness (in this situation, the ability to somehow know what the other's thinking, finish each other's sentences, etc), and oddly enough, as Lizzie Boredom mentions, that need for "someone who can be separate with me" - yes, but for me, simply separate in isolation from the physical and social world. Looking for that "click" in chemistry that leads them to do the opposite of what people usually do in being exhausting. Occasionally, I do, at least temporarily, find a person that instead energizes me with their presence, so that's the goal romantically, with someone who, therefore, doesn't violate my Type 5 need for isolation because they're the uniquely special person with which I can feel contently alone without actually being so. It'd be like a simulated solitude... because as mentioned before, we'd be so alike, even to the point of valuing comfortable silence together (I'm quite sensitive to sound), and picking up on hints for what the other needs, that it'd essentially be like being in solitude with myself. The physical and emotional recharge effect would be the same.

I wonder if this 5 SX looking for "emotional promiscuity" was a sx/so. I've seen this in them but never in a sx/sp. I wish this description of the 5 SX by Beatrice Chestnut differentiated between sx/so and sx/sp.
I'm sx/so but would never search for something like emotional promiscuity. I don't quite understand what would cause anyone to search for such a thing, either, to be honest. Not sure what it'd entail either. Agreed, though, I wish they went into such detail, too.

Huh? It was stated just above that we are picky bc not everyone can do ideal intimacy/romance. I don't avoid intimacy with my match, I run towards it. I'm typical SX; faster, harder, deeper... In a committed relationship I want to deeply connect and become 'one' -- the exact opposite of intimacy avoidance. I hold high standards so I can do intense intimacy (I can't achieve it with just anyone). I have no "fear of exposure" with my other half -- 'exposure' = intensity/intimacy/connection = yes please.
Can't agree with you more. I have the same feelings that you describe, but I'm an INFJ-T, Sexual 5w6 (592 Tritype). The concept of merging with nature mentioned, is really big, too; sometimes it's a sudden thing, and the very presence and beauty of nature will hit me like a ton of bricks, so that I can only sit and stare for a few hours, marveling at it.

Also agree with you on intensity levels ("faster, harder, deeper"). For me, my Type 5 avarice also extends further, into cherishing being and experiencing their firsts with them, and wanting to be their one and only best friend, muse, and the like, as they'd be with me, since, being such a loner, I've saved so much of myself, and life experiences for them, so having the same in return's golden. But, that's another story, as I don't know how much other 5's might feel that way; I'm a bit intense in that area (possibly overly so), because my primary love languages are service and gift-giving, so things like that, or other effort and actions taken, make me feel desired more than simple statements ever could.

This idea of holding the other to high standards is less relevant if you take the perspective that SX dominants can date fellow SX dominants who have similar views/needs. I'll also say that I have no desire to 'merge'/become 'one' with someone who isn't of 'my' standard/level -- this deep intimacy stuff is really personal, not just idealistic & romantic (well, for this sx/sp anyway).
That portion of the text from the book seems to be the usual recommendation I've read in other books on the topic, too. As if this natural reaction is, in essence, caused by other flaws and failings that, if fixed, will undo our need to test and have high standards. But your saying "this deep intimacy stuff is really personal, not just idealistic & romantic" is exactly it, as well. These aren't trivial "wants," but wholehearted needs, even to the point of proper mental health and emotional stability. Settling for less feels like it'd be a soul-crushing thing to have to contend with daily lol Just imagining it feels like it'd end in a life that's the equivalent of going through the motions, like a zombie... disintegrating and eroding daily, bit by bit, and never feeling or experiencing what could've made you fully alive. It'd end up not being the merging that actually made me lose myself, but the settling. I'd become a shell of myself, resorting to trying to abandon my desires and opinions to appease my partner, and minimize the possible surfacing of even more things we disagree on.

Sadly, because INFJs are harmony-seekers and 592 tritypes are anti-conflict, overlooking personal desires, and settling for the sake of other people's comfort and maintained harmony is a normal consideration. Have been told that that manner of "compromise" is also inevitable because no one will ever agree with me to the level that'd be comforting.

Taking that into consideration, I've often wondered about Enneagram books, and the path toward "nonattachment." The authors always say you should move away from your natural inclinations, but with a Sexual 5, at least for me, it ends up feeling like I'm being advised to settle for a relationship, a life, and goals that would make me less happy, having to ultimately numb, stifle and suffocate out my natural desires to become a shell of myself for the sake of being with someone (essentially most people, since the majority wouldn't match my ideals). That makes sense if one feels they absolutely have to be with someone else, but I wish they'd also explore the idea of accepting those desires, and instead of pushing them away and, in essence, softening or diminishing the intensity of them. To instead come to terms with the other option: the possibility of never finding that, and becoming okay with it. Perhaps even finding alternate fulfillment in acquiring and maintaining great, quality friendships instead, since they naturally wouldn't be held to the same standards romantic options would.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,264 Posts
@fidelisagna I agree with everything you said, right down to being sensitive to sound :) I prefer the term 'interdependent' to "pleasant codependency", but I suspect we mean the same thing. I especially liked what you said about halves of a whole gaining by 'merging' (becoming 'one'/whole/complete) rather than losing themselves. Since sx identifies as their relationship ('I am my relationship'), our view is to be expected. I can confirm that being in a relationship with a compatible 5 sx is both effortless & satisfying <3

Taking that into consideration, I've often wondered about Enneagram books, and the path toward "nonattachment." The authors always say you should move away from your natural inclinations, but with a Sexual 5, at least for me, it ends up feeling like I'm being advised to settle for a relationship, a life, and goals that would make me less happy, having to ultimately numb, stifle and suffocate out my natural desires to become a shell of myself for the sake of being with someone (essentially most people, since the majority wouldn't match my ideals). That makes sense if one feels they absolutely have to be with someone else, but I wish they'd also explore the idea of accepting those desires, and instead of pushing them away and, in essence, softening or diminishing the intensity of them. To instead come to terms with the other option: the possibility of never finding that, and becoming okay with it. Perhaps even finding alternate fulfillment in acquiring and maintaining great, quality friendships instead, since they naturally wouldn't be held to the same standards romantic options would.
I'm aware some people have the view that your core enneagram type is merely your fixation and a perfect person would be all types (this idea you mentioned of "move away from your natural inclinations"), so going 'beyond' being a 5, for example, is something to aspire to. I hesitate to adopt that view since I believe human nature 'specializes' for advantageous reasons. The non attachment of 5s and our willingness to go against people/norms make us better 'observers' which can produce profound results (Darwin etc). I cannot see 5 as merely a bad fixation for that reason, healthy ones anyway. Health levels count (unhealthy levels can be a bad fixation). I also think that between tritype, wings and 'lines' to other types, we are more than our core type -- there is some 'balance' there/available, even while we 'specialize'.

I see it a little differently with enneagram instincts. While I'm perfectly happy being sx/sp, not missing that I don't understand/desire/value (soc), now that I understand I have an enormous blind spot, I will put in some time (next year likely) trying to learn/see/practice soc and the value to it. It'll only ever be a skill rather than an instinct (it will never motivate me and it'll likely still repel me), but I think that is better than beginning my adult life with that weakness. So obviously I think it can be advantageous to learn your blindspot in instincts. That said, I'm never going to not be a sx dominant, there is no moving away from your instinct (only better balancing it).

I don't think you're meant to take the idea of 'non attachment' from (healthy) core 5 and apply that to the sx instinct, which by definition is connection. They are separate systems. I'm non attached in many ways but never in my romantic relationship (in any general/broad sense). Non attachment means things like not being stuck with one view or attached to an outcome/material items. It's not speaking to bonds in personal relationships.

When healthy, Fives specialize in what the Buddhists call “non-attachment”, an attitude towards living characterized by a paradoxical mixture of compassion and detachment. Fives can play life’s games without being attached to the results. They participate fully in events and yet don’t take them personally, striving without malice and surrendering with grace. One Five described the experience of non-attachment as “just like everyday life but lived two feet off the ground.” Author Thomas Mann, himself a Five, called the experience “erotic irony” implying both earthiness and detachment...Fives can also entertain many disparate points of view and enter into them all. The Dynamic Enneagram: Fives - Enneagram Monthly
"Erotic irony" describes my attitude towards life perfectly :)

I don't know why some like Beatrice Chestnut try to advise 5 sx to be less sx in romantic relationships. I understand that it's hard to find compatibility, very hard actually, but that doesn't mean settling is the solution. This seems especially the case for sx -- give me passion, intensity, make me feel alive or go away (so this 5 can return to her "fortress of the clear and evident" -- we are capable of merging with other things, like an interest).

With that sx survival instinct so driving and all-encompassing -- to the point of being difficult to control if unanswered too long -- it really doesn't do compromise, in me anyway. I also have this driving curiosity of what I am in an ideal romantic relationship (I expect to be changed by it) and how good it could be (note the non attachment to some preconceived idea there). I like going to the edge in things to take a peek (tends to be a peak experience too) -- a romantic relationship is no different.

I agree it would be nice if enneagram writers explored what the ideal 5 sx relationship could be rather than trying to manage our expectations to something more suburban. The nice thing about being a 5 sx though is we just go read about weird sx-ish stuff elsewhere. I found this the other day:

"In the ancient lore of the Celts it was said that when the men came home from battle, bloody and wounded, and full of fight and rage and death, the women would meet their men at the outskirts of the village with their breasts bared.”
Bottom line: I don't think the weird that is 5 sx goes back in the box :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
379 Posts
@fidelisagna I agree with everything you said, right down to being sensitive to sound :) I prefer the term 'interdependent' to "pleasant codependency", but I suspect we mean the same thing. I especially liked what you said about halves of a whole gaining by 'merging' (becoming 'one'/whole/complete) rather than losing themselves. Since sx identifies as their relationship ('I am my relationship'), our view is to be expected. I can confirm that being in a relationship with a compatible 5 sx is both effortless & satisfying <3



I'm aware some people have the view that your core enneagram type is merely your fixation and a perfect person would be all types (this idea you mentioned of "move away from your natural inclinations"), so going 'beyond' being a 5, for example, is something to aspire to. I hesitate to adopt that view since I believe human nature 'specializes' for advantageous reasons. The non attachment of 5s and our willingness to go against people/norms make us better 'observers' which can produce profound results (Darwin etc). I cannot see 5 as merely a bad fixation for that reason, healthy ones anyway. Health levels count (unhealthy levels can be a bad fixation). I also think that between tritype, wings and 'lines' to other types, we are more than our core type -- there is some 'balance' there/available, even while we 'specialize'.

I see it a little differently with enneagram instincts. While I'm perfectly happy being sx/sp, not missing that I don't understand/desire/value (soc), now that I understand I have an enormous blind spot, I will put in some time (next year likely) trying to learn/see/practice soc and the value to it. It'll only ever be a skill rather than an instinct (it will never motivate me and it'll likely still repel me), but I think that is better than beginning my adult life with that weakness. So obviously I think it can be advantageous to learn your blindspot in instincts. That said, I'm never going to not be a sx dominant, there is no moving away from your instinct (only better balancing it).

I don't think you're meant to take the idea of 'non attachment' from (healthy) core 5 and apply that to the sx instinct, which by definition is connection. They are separate systems. I'm non attached in many ways but never in my romantic relationship (in any general/broad sense). Non attachment means things like not being stuck with one view or attached to an outcome/material items. It's not speaking to bonds in personal relationships.



"Erotic irony" describes my attitude towards life perfectly :)

I don't know why some like Beatrice Chestnut try to advise 5 sx to be less sx in romantic relationships. I understand that it's hard to find compatibility, very hard actually, but that doesn't mean settling is the solution. This seems especially the case for sx -- give me passion, intensity, make me feel alive or go away (so this 5 can return to her "fortress of the clear and evident" -- we are capable of merging with other things, like an interest).

With that sx survival instinct so driving and all-encompassing -- to the point of being difficult to control if unanswered too long -- it really doesn't do compromise, in me anyway. I also have this driving curiosity of what I am in an ideal romantic relationship (I expect to be changed by it) and how good it could be (note the non attachment to some preconceived idea there). I like going to the edge in things to take a peek (tends to be a peak experience too) -- a romantic relationship is no different.

I agree it would be nice if enneagram writers explored what the ideal 5 sx relationship could be rather than trying to manage our expectations to something more suburban. The nice thing about being a 5 sx though is we just go read about weird sx-ish stuff elsewhere. I found this the other day:



Bottom line: I don't think the weird that is 5 sx goes back in the box :)
I resonate with this, in fact my last relationship was incredibly intense. Like other 5's we can still find what it means to have HOLY Omniscience, and since at least for me my fixation is partially oriented towards perfect knowledge in relationship related to the SX instinct, I think we can find truly holy omniscience, trusting in the knowledge of the universe, I think what BC might be trying to point out is that like a traditional 5 there is no way to "perfect" knowledge, just like there's no way to "perfect" knowledge related to intimacy, so while as an SX 5 I definitely want to pursue an intense connected relationship (and even do that with friends) and can have an amazing SX relationship, it doesn't have to be perfect... so I don't think she's advising to settle on the relationship, but rather dial back expectations as to how perfect the sharing etc can be, how quickly etc. IE an unhealthy SX 5 would get triggered when there was a failure in intimacy, and may refuse to understand that there needs to be a build up of trust etc. Though I'm not saying BC described it in the best way, but I think this is along the lines of what she was trying to suggest.

Along these lines I do have a bad tendency to drop friends when I feel like there is a breech in intimacy, even though they are trying. So I suppose it's still something for me to think about or work with.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,264 Posts
I resonate with this, in fact my last relationship was incredibly intense. Like other 5's we can still find what it means to have HOLY Omniscience, and since at least for me my fixation is partially oriented towards perfect knowledge in relationship related to the SX instinct, I think we can find truly holy omniscience, trusting in the knowledge of the universe, I think what BC might be trying to point out is that like a traditional 5 there is no way to "perfect" knowledge, just like there's no way to "perfect" knowledge related to intimacy, so while as an SX 5 I definitely want to pursue an intense connected relationship (and even do that with friends) and can have an amazing SX relationship, it doesn't have to be perfect... so I don't think she's advising to settle on the relationship, but rather dial back expectations as to how perfect the sharing etc can be, how quickly etc. IE an unhealthy SX 5 would get triggered when there was a failure in intimacy, and may refuse to understand that there needs to be a build up of trust etc. Though I'm not saying BC described it in the best way, but I think this is along the lines of what she was trying to suggest.

Along these lines I do have a bad tendency to drop friends when I feel like there is a breech in intimacy, even though they are trying. So I suppose it's still something for me to think about or work with.
I don't believe this is a matter of health. 5 sx behaves this way in romantic relationships regardless of health level (I'm on the high average/healthy levels). I agree 5 sx can be difficult for people compared to the norm -- we're often too much (intense/sensitive) or too little (overwhelmed/withdrawn). Ocean Moonshine said a similar thing:

Sexual/self-pres Fives tend to forge strong connections quickly and deeply, but if they feel betrayed, begin to feel overwhelmed, or if they feel that the connection doesn’t serve their true needs, can seem to cut the connection precipitously and “go cold.” https://oceanmoonshine9.wordpress.com/five-stacks/
The thing I object to is the whole notion of telling an outlier to become closer to 'normal'. I dislike 'norm' being the set standard for all and the implication that not normal is somehow 'bad' or deficient in some way. I take the view I'm actually a highly tuned system designed to enable a higher high in romantic relationships. If there is a breach in intimacy, I cannot function in that relationship any longer (something MUST be changed immediately). It's not something I can hide or minimize (some men actually find this ideal). Is this a flaw or is this brilliant given 'normals' often go through the motions in their relationships with an elephant in the room?

I suggest we aren't just fussy bastards (although there is that), I say we're tailor made for the relationship we need. Don't tell a bird with webbed feet to like water less! This is even more so given the significance of a relationship to a sx person and the sensitivity factor often present with 5 sx. Anyone whose survival-safety and identity is going to be wrapped up in their relationship ("I am my relationship"), surely should be highly discerning and only build where safe to do so. I am a strangely sensitive girl in other relationship ways too (like sex) -- no 'please try to be a little more normal' is going to change me, even if I tried. And I have to laugh at the suggestion bc normal isn't just around the corner from here :)

And as I've said before, there is no need to change when we can just date a fellow 5 sx -- we can be fussy and sensitive and intense together. My experience is when it's (finally) right, when the compatibility/connection is there, it's all very easy. This is very true for me:

They live according to a strictly personal outlook and are not particularly concerned with the approval of others outside of their immediate concern... If they find a soulmate they will unite without fanfare, forming a secret bond, dealing with formalities as an afterthought. https://www.personalitycafe.com/enneagram-personality-theory-forum/6634-instinctual-variants.html
I'm a lot more 'let nature take it's course' and 'let's get married in secret at the gov't office someday' than 'look what everyone else is doing.' If pressed, I'd be frank: more often than not, the way 'normal' people do romantic relationships sucks. And as a 5 sx, I've read many books written by relationship experts (lol -- could I be any more stereotypical for my type if I tried?). While, yes, a good deal of that needs to go out the window when meeting your match (people are individuals) -- what kind of a 5 would I be if I didn't believe knowledge is power (or INTJ if I didn't believe in systems building).

Perfection is just a direction, a light in the distance, something to aim for. Perhaps moreso for 513 me, it's about striving for it, using a combination of approaches to get as close to the ideal as humans are allowed while having that awareness that the most beautiful things are usually slightly flawed and being grateful for all we have. Which I guess reveals the other argument against trying to be closer to normal -- 5 sx is a highly romantic type, with the 4 wing especially (we not only look for a high ideal but romanticize what we actually have).

I may only be compatible with a tiny percentage of the population but this (optimal romantic relationship building) is what I was born for. Given the immense satisfaction I derive from it, I wouldn't have it any other way :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
379 Posts
I don't believe this is a matter of health. 5 sx behaves this way in romantic relationships regardless of health level (I'm on the high average/healthy levels). I agree 5 sx can be difficult for people compared to the norm -- we're often too much (intense/sensitive) or too little (overwhelmed/withdrawn). Ocean Moonshine said a similar thing:



The thing I object to is the whole notion of telling an outlier to become closer to 'normal'. I dislike 'norm' being the set standard for all and the implication that not normal is somehow 'bad' or deficient in some way. I take the view I'm actually a highly tuned system designed to enable a higher high in romantic relationships. If there is a breach in intimacy, I cannot function in that relationship any longer (something MUST be changed immediately). It's not something I can hide or minimize (some men actually find this ideal). Is this a flaw or is this brilliant given 'normals' often go through the motions in their relationships with an elephant in the room?

I suggest we aren't just fussy bastards (although there is that), I say we're tailor made for the relationship we need. Don't tell a bird with webbed feet to like water less! This is even more so given the significance of a relationship to a sx person and the sensitivity factor often present with 5 sx. Anyone whose survival-safety and identity is going to be wrapped up in their relationship ("I am my relationship"), surely should be highly discerning and only build where safe to do so. I am a strangely sensitive girl in other relationship ways too (like sex) -- no 'please try to be a little more normal' is going to change me, even if I tried. And I have to laugh at the suggestion bc normal isn't just around the corner from here :)

And as I've said before, there is no need to change when we can just date a fellow 5 sx -- we can be fussy and sensitive and intense together. My experience is when it's (finally) right, when the compatibility/connection is there, it's all very easy. This is very true for me:



I'm a lot more 'let nature take it's course' and 'let's get married in secret at the gov't office someday' than 'look what everyone else is doing.' If pressed, I'd be frank: more often than not, the way 'normal' people do romantic relationships sucks. And as a 5 sx, I've read many books written by relationship experts (lol -- could I be any more stereotypical for my type if I tried?). While, yes, a good deal of that needs to go out the window when meeting your match (people are individuals) -- what kind of a 5 would I be if I didn't believe knowledge is power (or INTJ if I didn't believe in systems building).

Perfection is just a direction, a light in the distance, something to aim for. Perhaps moreso for 513 me, it's about striving for it, using a combination of approaches to get as close to the ideal as humans are allowed while having that awareness that the most beautiful things are usually slightly flawed and being grateful for all we have. Which I guess reveals the other argument against trying to be closer to normal -- 5 sx is a highly romantic type, with the 4 wing especially (we not only look for a high ideal but romanticize what we actually have).

I may only be compatible with a tiny percentage of the population but this (optimal romantic relationship building) is what I was born for. Given the immense satisfaction I derive from it, I wouldn't have it any other way :)
Maybe that's true but where do I meet another SX 5 in real life!? It seems impossible.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
379 Posts
I don't believe this is a matter of health. 5 sx behaves this way in romantic relationships regardless of health level (I'm on the high average/healthy levels). I agree 5 sx can be difficult for people compared to the norm -- we're often too much (intense/sensitive) or too little (overwhelmed/withdrawn). Ocean Moonshine said a similar thing:



The thing I object to is the whole notion of telling an outlier to become closer to 'normal'. I dislike 'norm' being the set standard for all and the implication that not normal is somehow 'bad' or deficient in some way. I take the view I'm actually a highly tuned system designed to enable a higher high in romantic relationships. If there is a breach in intimacy, I cannot function in that relationship any longer (something MUST be changed immediately). It's not something I can hide or minimize (some men actually find this ideal). Is this a flaw or is this brilliant given 'normals' often go through the motions in their relationships with an elephant in the room?

I suggest we aren't just fussy bastards (although there is that), I say we're tailor made for the relationship we need. Don't tell a bird with webbed feet to like water less! This is even more so given the significance of a relationship to a sx person and the sensitivity factor often present with 5 sx. Anyone whose survival-safety and identity is going to be wrapped up in their relationship ("I am my relationship"), surely should be highly discerning and only build where safe to do so. I am a strangely sensitive girl in other relationship ways too (like sex) -- no 'please try to be a little more normal' is going to change me, even if I tried. And I have to laugh at the suggestion bc normal isn't just around the corner from here :)

And as I've said before, there is no need to change when we can just date a fellow 5 sx -- we can be fussy and sensitive and intense together. My experience is when it's (finally) right, when the compatibility/connection is there, it's all very easy. This is very true for me:



I'm a lot more 'let nature take it's course' and 'let's get married in secret at the gov't office someday' than 'look what everyone else is doing.' If pressed, I'd be frank: more often than not, the way 'normal' people do romantic relationships sucks. And as a 5 sx, I've read many books written by relationship experts (lol -- could I be any more stereotypical for my type if I tried?). While, yes, a good deal of that needs to go out the window when meeting your match (people are individuals) -- what kind of a 5 would I be if I didn't believe knowledge is power (or INTJ if I didn't believe in systems building).

Perfection is just a direction, a light in the distance, something to aim for. Perhaps moreso for 513 me, it's about striving for it, using a combination of approaches to get as close to the ideal as humans are allowed while having that awareness that the most beautiful things are usually slightly flawed and being grateful for all we have. Which I guess reveals the other argument against trying to be closer to normal -- 5 sx is a highly romantic type, with the 4 wing especially (we not only look for a high ideal but romanticize what we actually have).

I may only be compatible with a tiny percentage of the population but this (optimal romantic relationship building) is what I was born for. Given the immense satisfaction I derive from it, I wouldn't have it any other way :)
Along health lines, I believe that a traditional view of health has healthy level as "feels good about oneself, able to operate in normal ability patterns 'for a 5' ". Perhaps because I was extra unhealthy in my 5/9'ness withdrawal and disengagement combined... I felt like I needed to go beyond that (ie I was desperate, rock bottom). And in order to do that, I had to get to some very triggered places and move not past them, but through them for growth. I also believe that phenomenon, of trying to move past things is why so many believe growth isn't possible or is very slow, and that many think fundamental change is impossible. Because true fundamental change requires that I look at what terrifies me, actually achieving that change required a way of being that many would not dare to try. It's also why for so many (including me) fundamental change requires hitting some "bottom" the pain of the current way of being has to get so bad that fear and pain required for fundamental growth isn't as scary as going back to the "bottom".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
A Tinder for sexual fives would be a great idea!

But, seriously, i think that this describes me perfectly
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24 Posts
I just took the Enneagram test two days ago and scored a 5. It was not a surprise to me, as I have consistently tested as an INTJ throughout my adult life. But there has been one aspect of myself that has always seemed contradictory to my introversion and need to withdraw under any type of stress. After some additional research, though, I discovered the subset of the sexual 5. I now feel as if I have an accurate description for my complicated and sometimes inexplicable personality. But I am now more confused than ever as to how to proceed from here. I am on my second marriage (with a 1), and have had numerous affairs. It has almost become an obsession to find this deep spiritual connection with another person that I know is irrational and impossible to find. I read the Chestnut excerpt above and found her paragraph on work to do for this subset to be lacking in any concrete ways to overcome this part of myself that has seemed to consume my life. It is already so hard to live in a world that does not accept or understand people like 5's who thrive on being alone or in very small intimate groups. People don't understand our constant existential search for knowledge that never seems to be satisfied or fulfilled. But adding this sexual subset to this already difficult personality type has left me depressed and completely baffled as to where to go from here. I realize that sexual ideation is a big part of this subset, but how to change this destructive thought pattern is where I need some real guidance. I'd appreciate any insight you all can provide. It's nice to know that I am not alone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
113 Posts
I just took the Enneagram test two days ago and scored a 5. It was not a surprise to me, as I have consistently tested as an INTJ throughout my adult life. But there has been one aspect of myself that has always seemed contradictory to my introversion and need to withdraw under any type of stress. After some additional research, though, I discovered the subset of the sexual 5. I now feel as if I have an accurate description for my complicated and sometimes inexplicable personality. But I am now more confused than ever as to how to proceed from here. I am on my second marriage (with a 1), and have had numerous affairs. It has almost become an obsession to find this deep spiritual connection with another person that I know is irrational and impossible to find. I read the Chestnut excerpt above and found her paragraph on work to do for this subset to be lacking in any concrete ways to overcome this part of myself that has seemed to consume my life. It is already so hard to live in a world that does not accept or understand people like 5's who thrive on being alone or in very small intimate groups. People don't understand our constant existential search for knowledge that never seems to be satisfied or fulfilled. But adding this sexual subset to this already difficult personality type has left me depressed and completely baffled as to where to go from here. I realize that sexual ideation is a big part of this subset, but how to change this destructive thought pattern is where I need some real guidance. I'd appreciate any insight you all can provide. It's nice to know that I am not alone.
You might find some use in the levels of health descriptions. Lower levels being where one goes when not in the best shape of mine (i.e. looking for the wrong things in life -> down a dark spiral of despair etc. etc.)

For a Type 5:

https://www.enneagraminstitute.com/type-5
&
https://acoarecovery.wordpress.com/2014/12/17/enneagram-9-level-for-type-5/

Hope they help :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dare

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
First thanks for the post, it was amazingly accurate!
For me, the only part that doesn't click with me is the 'having high standards' part. I don't know if it's because I'm not yet aware of that or what, but I've felt attraction and fallen in love with a good number of people that are really far from perfection.
Also, do you sexual 5s feel like you just boicot yourselves all the time? Like, I've had a lot of people liking me, and in the moment that I felt it, I had a huge block with them, almost an urge to escape. Not that they did anything wrong, and I love playing the seduction game, but when I knew it for sure, I detached, and I feel really bad not only for them, but for me, because I'm denying myself something that I've always missed, and wanted.
Sometimes I feel like rather than hetero/gay/whatever, I'm oh-so-I-can't-have-you-sexual. Can you relate? I'm trying to work on that and opening myself more, though I can't control who I fall in love with, and that's infuriating sometimes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,264 Posts
do you sexual 5s feel like you just boicot yourselves all the time? Like, I've had a lot of people liking me, and in the moment that I felt it, I had a huge block with them, almost an urge to escape.
Lol, I wear sneakers to parties in preparation for my inevitable escape run.

Not that they did anything wrong, and I love playing the seduction game, but when I knew it for sure, I detached, and I feel really bad not only for them, but for me, because I'm denying myself something that I've always missed, and wanted.
I don't love the seduction game at all. I only like real, raw compatibility; the incredibly rare, unexpected chemical stuff that fills the air and makes me feel intoxicated. People wanting to be 'mechanically sexual' (from my pov) are everywhere. That's not what I'm after, at all. I run from that.

Sometimes I feel like rather than hetero/gay/whatever, I'm oh-so-I-can't-have-you-sexual. Can you relate?
I'm more no-no-no in my interactions. I even avoid making eye contact to not 'start anything'. On rare occasion I might smile at someone admirable/close to compatible (can't help it) but I stay very careful not to 'step into that world'/lead anyone on (unless all the compatibility stuff lines up -- I surprised myself by how shameless I was with the hints when I met Mr Right). I am insanely fussy/sensitive/authentic when it comes to SX. It's a shame bc being coy in that context seems like fun :)

I'm trying to work on that and opening myself more, though I can't control who I fall in love with, and that's infuriating sometimes.
I can't control how that door to another dimension opens either but that's part of the joy :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Lol, I wear sneakers to parties in preparation for my inevitable escape run.
That just cracked me up HAHAHAH truee

I don't love the seduction game at all. I only like real, raw compatibility; the incredibly rare, unexpected chemical stuff that fills the air and makes me feel intoxicated. People wanting to be 'mechanically sexual' (from my pov) are everywhere. That's not what I'm after, at all. I run from that.
Oh my god that's such a beautiful way to explain it. I'm not an English native, with the seduction game I referred more to what you wrote, to the feeling of getting high next to someone, the occasional looks, the touches that honestly get me to the next level. In fact if someone tries to flirt with me with just sex as their goal, this kind of flirting that feels like they're trying to convince you rather than wanting YOU to be with them, I'm very likely to grab those snickers

I'm more no-no-no in my interactions. I even avoid making eye contact to not 'start anything'.
Oh I don't know, I love to make eye contact in general, otherwise I feel like I'm behind a glass and the other person's far away from me. And something else that usually happens to me is lowkey wanting men to look at me. Like wanting male attention. Even if I'm not at all into the guy :( I don't know if it's because I have a 4 wing or what (you are the same so that's not the case now that I realize), it just happens to me and I try not to judge it too much, even though I know it's not okay at all

On rare occasion I might smile at someone admirable/close to compatible (can't help it) but I stay very careful not to 'step into that world'/lead anyone on (unless all the compatibility stuff lines up -- I surprised myself by how shameless I was with the hints when I met Mr Right). I am insanely fussy/sensitive/authentic when it comes to SX. It's a shame bc being coy in that context seems like fun :)
LOL I just had to search for the meaning of coy. Yeah, I'm extremely shy when it comes to anything romantic, even though I feel it so hard and intensely. That's why I haven't had a boyfriend yet, because as the post says I've been waiting for somebody wanting me so much that they'll do all of the work to reach me (and that usually is enough to pull me off or making me feel invaded) so I think that's not a shame that you don't have to experience that shy crap haha I'd rather be brave

I can't control how that door to another dimension opens either but that's part of the joy :)
Yes girl, thanks for the answer and all, and let's keep trying to push our narrow reality further anytime <3
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,264 Posts
Oh I don't know, I love to make eye contact in general, otherwise I feel like I'm behind a glass and the other person's far away from me.
Precisely, I use it to control 'distance'.

And something else that usually happens to me is lowkey wanting men to look at me. Like wanting male attention. Even if I'm not at all into the guy :( I don't know if it's because I have a 4 wing or what...
Wanting male attention is pretty normal for females, don't beat yourself up about it.

I'm the odd one for finding it a bit overwhelming, a bit invasive, potentially frightening (if I'm alone somewhere). I really don't like to be looked upon sexually by someone I'm not in a sexual relationship with. Sex is so personal to me... I think this is behind my walk-looking-slightly-down/avoid-eye-contact-with-men thing I do. In my fantasy world I'm an invisible girl who only becomes visible when Mr Right enters the room :)

My neurosis is more about being attractive for Mr Right. So even if I'm trying to hide behind loose, dull colored clothing in everday life, I'm still taking good care of my body/skin/hair etc so that I have the power to attract when it's time to put on a little dress. If my special one didn't find me attractive, yeah I might die. Probably right there & then. So you aren't alone in female silliness here <3

I've been waiting for somebody wanting me so much that they'll do all of the work to reach me (and that usually is enough to pull me off or making me feel invaded) so I think that's not a shame that you don't have to experience that shy crap haha I'd rather be brave
:) Maybe, like me, you'll surprise yourself by being brave when your Mr Right appears. IME when it's 'right' it just works.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,431 Posts
(snip)


Huh? It was stated just above that we are picky bc not everyone can do ideal intimacy/romance. I don't avoid intimacy with my match, I run towards it. I'm typical SX; faster, harder, deeper... In a committed relationship I want to deeply connect and become 'one' -- the exact opposite of intimacy avoidance. I hold high standards so I can do intense intimacy (I can't achieve it with just anyone). I have no "fear of exposure" with my other half -- 'exposure' = intensity/intimacy/connection = yes please.
The two halves of a pair of scissors. Distinct and yet one unit.
This idea of holding the other to high standards is less relevant if you take the perspective that SX dominants can date fellow SX dominants who have similar views/needs. I'll also say that I have no desire to 'merge'/become 'one' with someone who isn't of 'my' standard/level -- this deep intimacy stuff is really personal, not just idealistic & romantic (well, for this sx/sp anyway).
How can one achieve the fearsome oneness with someone essentially mismatched? It'd be like an engine that was a 4-cylinder on the left side and a turbocharged fuel injected V8 on the other.
The one would drive the other to the detriment of both.

(snip)
Finding out something, just one thing, was held back or I was misled would completely rattle me, trigger a typical e5 withdraw and devastate the confidence I had in the relationship (where telling me the same thing in a timely manner would likely be positive even if the content itself wasn't necessarily). I think I'm quite different to an 'average' person in that regard. Extreme ideal intimacy, a genuine deep connection, means so much -- I imagine it's this confidence in one another that is referred to with the e5 SX descriptions. I like that Naranjo calls us "confidence" due to our ability to trust the other. When you fully open yourself up and 'merge' and/or pair-bond it is a significant risk -- not one I'd take without deep trust (and an ability to trust).
Could not have said it better; except, perhaps, if the other person said, "I'll tell you, but not yet." There is a period of feeling out, assessing, forging the merges and links and commonalities; and there is also the ever-present question of values and phrasing. ("Rank these items in importance from 1-10." OK, but what if your #2 is their #5, and everything else matches?). You might have to figure out how to deliver the news.

I can see why conveying confidence could be seen as important for attracting a similar partner/friends. It's been interesting to me that my closest friends irl are all e8 (or have an e8 wing). They like truth too. Honesty is a form of intimacy in a way. I have to laugh though bc people (in general) seem to want the truth about as badly as they want intimacy, which is to say, very little. That said, I think a lot of types come across as confident, not just SX e5s, many of whom are not SX.
Doesn't the 5 grow into the 8 and the 8 retreat into the 5?
You meet, so to speak, at the frontier.
 
41 - 60 of 60 Posts
Top