Personality Cafe banner
1 - 20 of 41 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
272 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
The Sexual One - "Zeal" (Countertype)

While the Self-Preservation One is a perfectionist, and the Social One unconsciously takes on the pose of someone who is "perfect" in modeling to the right way to be, Sexual Ones focus on perfecting others, This One is more of a reformer than a perfectionist. They have a need to improve others, but don't focus on being perfect themselves.

This is the only One subtype that is explicitly angry and so is the countertype of the three One personalities. The Sexual One is impatient, can be invasive, goes for what he or she wants, and has a sense of entitlement. These Ones have an intensity of desire fueled by anger that motivates them to want to improve others. This can be expressed as a sense of excitement, passion, or idealism about the way things could be if people would reform their behavior, or if the reforms they envision were enacted by society. This makes them compelling and vehement.

This character feels entitled in the sense of possessing the mentality of a reformer or a zealot-one who knows how to live or do things better and so feels a right to assert their will over others. Like the mentality of a conqueror, this approach can be rationalized (and made virtuous through the rhetoric of their adherence to a higher moral code or calling.

According to Naranjo, Ichazo gave this subtype the name, "Zeal," meaning "a special intensity of desire." Zeal suggests an intensity or excitement that fuels the desire to connect with others. It also means doing things with care, dedication, and fervor.

This One's anger infuses his desire with a special intensity or urgency and the person has the sense that "I have to have it," or "I have a right to it," or “I have to improve it (society or another person) to make it the way I know it should be."

In a collective sense, this can be seen in the idea of "manifest destiny," the ideology that justified the takeover of the western part of the United States from the Native Americans in the 1800s. Despite what our retrospective view of that period might be, this philosophy was a justification for the white man taking over land populated by "savages." Another example of this ideology can be seen in the minds of conquerors, as when the Spanish conquered South America. The rhetoric displayed there was, "I can take this because I'm noble and civilized."

In the Sexual One, this intensity of desire can support the impulse to reform or perfect specific others or to make the world a better place in the way this One believes it should be. Sometimes, this desire to perfect others grows out of a genuine belief in an enlightened vision of reform or idealism. However, it may at the same time be fueled by this instinctual subtype's need to make others more perfect. One woman I know with this subtype reported that she felt she would be justified in leaving her husband if he did not carry out her suggestions for his improvement. And she felt a need to help him become a better person so she could have a better partner.

In Western culture there can be an anti-sexual or anti-instinctual sentiment-the idea that it's not okay to act on one's desires. For instance, the sinfulness of sex is so pervasive that it can be hard sometimes not to feel improper or naughty if we allow ourselves to freely express our sexual desires. But the Sexual One has a different, more liberated, attitude with regard to sexual desire. There’s a kind of "go for it" mentality that can then necessitate the finding of good reasons to support the rightness of whatever the Sexual One wants to do. Unlike the Self-Preservation Ones, these Ones don't question themselves as much. Instead they are concerned more with making others into the people they think they should be.

These Ones are avengers; they are not afraid of confrontations. They may be containing a murderous rage that they cannot see. Their anger can be like a volcano that erupts. They perceive themselves as strong. They have great strength and determination and can be very brave. They are also impulsive and do things quickly.

Sexual Ones have two sides: a more playful side oriented toward pleasure and an aggressive, angry side. Pain is the emotion they repress the most and the one they find most difficult to show. They may act out their unacknowledged pain by leading a double life as a way of breaking the rules. Some Sexual Ones display "trap-door" behavior, discharging their anger and pain through "bad" acts. An example of this is Eliot Spitzer. As the Attorney General of the State of New York, he crusaded against lawbreakers, going after Wall Street criminals and prostitutes in an effort to reform society. However, he later resigned as the Governor when he was caught having an ongoing relationship with a prostitute himself.

In light of this type of behavior, this One can look like a type Eight. Like Eights they can be energetic, assertive, and strong. These Ones believe the have a right to impose their vision and get what they need, in the same way an Eight might overpower or dominate a situation to impose their own will. But Eights and Ones differ in that Ones are "over-social" and Eights are "under-social."

Sexual Ones bring intensity and energy to relationships. They can be forceful and insistent. They may attempt to reform their partners and friends, conveying the sense of being on a mission or drawing on a higher calling or authority in the things they do. They excel at pointing out what others might need to do to reform their behavior or meet specific standards, but focus less interest and attention in reforming their own behavior, seeing what they do as right.




Sally, a Sexual One, speaks:

I have a strong need for order in my relationships. This order is determined by my moral code of conduct, which holds my internal world together. When this is disrupted (which is quite often) I can be edgy, critical, demanding, and insensitive. I have often been unaware of how I wanted to (and tried to) fix or improve others. It just seems so right to bring order through clear communication and the sharing of insights.

I can be very jealous when others seem to enjoy closer connections that I do. And I am more than alert to my partner's placement of attention, especially on another woman! My intensity often surprises me! And I see now how challenging it can be for those around me.

Specific Work For The Sexual One on the Path from Vice to Virtue

Sexual Ones can travel the path from anger to serenity through being clearer about the deeper motives behind the desire to perfect others. You are worthy not because you help us learn how to reform and improver ourselves, but because you deeply value the higher goal of creating a better world. Explore your impulses and feelings to the point where you gain a thorough understanding of the sources of your zeal. Put your idealism and energy behind the task of knowing yourself first, before you try to offer the gift of your love of the right way to others. Your self-knowledge and humility will only deepen and purify what your want to share with those around you. Your high ideals and the energy you put behind their realization can truly change the world for the better, but only after you make the unconscious fuel behind your passion more conscious.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,677 Posts
They have a need to improve others, but don't focus on being perfect themselves.
Perhaps because I identify as Sx>So>Sp, I disagree that we don't "focus" on being perfect. I put less focus into it than a Social 1 would, and I especially do not give a shit about societal expectations of "perfection," but I still focus on personal perfection. Sexual 1s are STILL type 1!

This character feels entitled in the sense of possessing the mentality of a reformer or a zealot-one who knows how to live or do things better and so feels a right to assert their will over others. Like the mentality of a conqueror, this approach can be rationalized (and made virtuous through the rhetoric of their adherence to a higher moral code or calling.
This gives the false impression that I am always driven as a zealot in all things. I am only a zealot when I "know" (or sense) that I am right. Being a superego type, this is polarized: I am either full-steam or unsure. At times when others seem incompetent, I may exhibit both at the same time.

There’s a kind of "go for it" mentality that can then necessitate the finding of good reasons to support the rightness of whatever the Sexual One wants to do. Unlike the Self-Preservation Ones, these Ones don't question themselves as much. Instead they are concerned more with making others into the people they think they should be.
I resonate more with "Why SHOULDN'T I?" than the idea of finding reasons to consider my actions moral. I don't ask "is it moral" nearly as much as "is it IMMORAL?"

I still doubt myself plenty.

These Ones are avengers; they are not afraid of confrontations. They may be containing a murderous rage that they cannot see. Their anger can be like a volcano that erupts. They perceive themselves as strong. They have great strength and determination and can be very brave. They are also impulsive and do things quickly.
I avoid confrontation. 9-wing, after all. I am afraid of confrontation in many cases, but it depends on the case. Physical? I hate myself for not being able to show that buff asshole who's better. Emotional? I don't want to deal with that bullshit. Intellectual? Bring it on. Just don't be a pain in the ass, otherwise I'm afraid of wasting my time talking to a brainless asshole.

Sexual Ones have two sides: a more playful side oriented toward pleasure and an aggressive, angry side.
I have more sides than that. For example, I have a sincere/emotional/romantic/expressive side. I also have a withdrawn, self-critical side. I'm multifaceted.

Pain is the emotion they repress the most and the one they find most difficult to show.
...because I feel guilty for using my pain to draw attention to myself.
...because I feel like a burden on others at those times.
...because I feel that others won't understand and that it will bring more bother than relief.

Some Sexual Ones display "trap-door" behavior, discharging their anger and pain through "bad" acts. An example of this is Eliot Spitzer. As the Attorney General of the State of New York, he crusaded against lawbreakers, going after Wall Street criminals and prostitutes in an effort to reform society. However, he later resigned as the Governor when he was caught having an ongoing relationship with a prostitute himself.
I never have "trapdoor behavior" that contradicts my own morality, but I do sometimes feel like doing things just to go against societal values that I consider improper, because society is often punitive of things that are not immoral. For example, marijuana use is NOT immoral, so I have no problem smoking, but I do still fear punishment by the law. I'm kind of 6-ish in that paranoia.

But Eights and Ones differ in that Ones are "over-social" and Eights are "under-social."
What does this even mean?

I can be very jealous when others seem to enjoy closer connections that I do. And I am more than alert to my partner's placement of attention, especially on another woman! My intensity often surprises me! And I see now how challenging it can be for those around me.
I think that jealousy is petty, but it took me until I had my first relationship to realize that I can be very jealous. When I have feelings like this that make me doubt myself, I shut off and try to understand and resolve my feelings.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
257 Posts
tons of this is presumptuous and is definitely off-the-mark, at least personally. i am zealous, but not at all driven by anger. my desire to perfect others (and myself — as @Dalton said, a sexual one is still a one) is driven by an idealistic vision. i fail to understand how someone's perfection could be driven by anger... that doesn't make sense to me. i also doubt myself frequently, and while i might, indeed, instinctually confront someone who i think is opposing my idea of how things do or should work, i back down after they've reacted because i can't stand conflict. that, at least, is in line with something she said: i'm impulsive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,677 Posts
tons of this is presumptuous and is definitely off-the-mark, at least personally. i am zealous, but not at all driven by anger. my desire to perfect others (and myself — as @Dalton said, a sexual one is still a one) is driven by an idealistic vision. i fail to understand how someone's perfection could be driven by anger... that doesn't make sense to me. i also doubt myself frequently, and while i might, indeed, instinctually confront someone who i think is opposing my idea of how things do or should work, i back down after they've reacted because i can't stand conflict. that, at least, is in line with something she said: i'm impulsive.
Anger at how the world fails to meet our ideals, which is a key part of type One as far as I'm aware.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
775 Posts
Yeah, I pretty much disagree with all of that. Except that sx 1s have a vibe like 8s. I think it's just the intensity. Both types require ridiculous and unrealistic levels of strength from themselves--8s because it's their thing, 1s because it's necessary to meet our other standards. Other than that, most of the description sounds like it could apply to sx/so maybe? But I just can't see sx/sp being THAT focused on other people, not even a significant other. Or maybe it's more of a wing thing--isn't a strong focus on others a 2 thing? I always assumed 1w2 would make someone want to apply their standards to others, since they see their perfectionism as improving things, and they want to help other people. But I can't see someone with a strong 9 wing fitting this description.

I'm a 1w9 sx/sp, and an ex and good friend of mine is a 1w2 sx/so. Neither of us try to change other people. We do find ourselves frustrated when we can see things other people could do to make their lives easier/better. He's more vocal about it, although it's usually in rants to the general public on Facebook instead of personal conversations--it IS something that bothers him quite often. But. Neither of us feel like we should try and change people. Even if I know I can come up with a plan or strategy to fix myself, if I try to think of applying anything like that to someone else, .. just, no. What do I know? Who the fuck am I? I don't know what I'm doing. I give advice when someone asks, and I try to understand what people are going through and why they're doing what they do, and help them understand their situation on a deeper level. But no matter how much I understand a situation, I'm never comfortable "asserting my will" over anyone else, not even a tiny bit. My mom called me wise once and it absolutely terrified me, and I've second-guessed every bit of advice I've given her since. Because I didn't think she actually took me seriously before. The idea that she would listen to what I say and act on it isn't something I'm really comfortable with at all. I like having my ideas considered and valued, but only if they're considered by an audience that will (objectively) tear them to shreds and point out every tiny flaw and make my ideas better. If I think people are just going to passively accept and go with what I might suggest, I won't say anything at all if I have a choice.

The bit about sx 1s not being as focused on perfecting themselves is absolutely bizarre to me. The ex will shred himself trying not to even let himself get involved with someone (someone who likes him, and he's attracted to) because he's not perfect enough, because he thinks he'll hurt them. His standards are impossible, which he kind of knows, but it doesn't matter. He sees every flaw and mistake he makes, and they're beyond inexcusable. He never blames the person he's with, he never tries to change them--anything they did that they could possibly be blamed for only happened because he wasn't good enough in the first place. Everything comes down to something he should deal with by fixing himself. And I'm pretty much the same, although I'm a bit easier on myself (sx/sp vs sx/so difference, I think) and slip into that dissociative 9 trance before I can be TOO hard on myself.


For both of us, actually trying to intervene and change the behavior of others is a last resort and we find it incredibly stressful and uncomfortable. It's something we usually only do with family, and if it isn't wanted or helping, we can't sustain it long at all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
95 Posts
But Eights and Ones differ in that Ones are "over-social" and Eights are "under-social."

What does this even mean?
This is academic jargon, it means adhering to the norms and customs of society. "Social" means a willingness to go along, while the opposite (under or anti-social) means a tendency to go against the norms and customs of society. So just switch the word "social" to "cultural":

But Eights and Ones differ in that Ones are "over-cultural" and Eights are "under-cultural."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,677 Posts
It's odd so many people find this description to be inaccurate, because it fits me scarily well, something I'd guess most people who know me could also attest.
There was only a single person who outright disagreed with any particular part of the description and still types as type 1.
@ruskiix That was you. Do you still type as Sexual 1? Has your opinion of Chestnut's description changed?

I don't like to agree so wholeheartedly with this, although I definitely didn't disagree with the description. I have a counter-balance against vague language so that I don't fall victim to the Forer Effect (I tend to over-emphasize my disagreements, perhaps related to my anger at imperfection). I wouldn't say that Chestnut's description was wrong, but given the brief-yet-broad format, it needs improvements to diminish vagueness.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
775 Posts
There was only a single person who outright disagreed with any particular part of the description and still types as type 1.
@ruskiix That was you. Do you still type as Sexual 1? Has your opinion of Chestnut's description changed?

I don't like to agree so wholeheartedly with this, although I definitely didn't disagree with the description. I have a counter-balance against vague language so that I don't fall victim to the Forer Effect (I tend to over-emphasize my disagreements, perhaps related to my anger at imperfection). I wouldn't say that Chestnut's description was wrong, but given the brief-yet-broad format, it needs improvements to diminish vagueness.
I need to reread the full post and my novel of a response and I'm on my phone. But. Definitely still sx 1. And at a glance I think the description just is reaaaally different than how I'd describe any of that, but not necessarily that different in meaning. And some of the specifics of behavior and attitude seriously clash with my Fe and are things I'd only experience when pretty unhealthy. The intensity and drive and need to make things better aren't so far off, but the aggression and force of will aren't how I act or think. I also think the INFJ kind of self-suppression clashes a lot with the description.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,677 Posts
I need to reread the full post and my novel of a response and I'm on my phone. But. Definitely still sx 1. And at a glance I think the description just is reaaaally different than how I'd describe any of that, but not necessarily that different in meaning. And some of the specifics of behavior and attitude seriously clash with my Fe and are things I'd only experience when pretty unhealthy. The intensity and drive and need to make things better aren't so far off, but the aggression and force of will aren't how I act or think. I also think the INFJ kind of self-suppression clashes a lot with the description.
The common notes about aggression don't apply to my usual self either. My true aggression is suppressed, unless I'm feeling excited or unhealthy, and even then my aggression is dampened by my beliefs of "what is correct behavior" when it comes to the aggression.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,167 Posts
Hmm, perhaps Chesnut's description is biased to people on the Te-Fi axis then, or perhaps people with 2 wings. Because the forceful will and periodic aggression does describe me, perhaps better than I wish it did. It's like a deeply-held belief that I have the right to have what I want because of my "rightness" for lack of a better word, and woe betide the person that stands between me and what I want. This side of me doesn't show up that often (in fact, a lot of people tell me I have a calm presence) but it does flare up fairly often, especially when I'm put into conflict with another person.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
775 Posts
@Zamyatin, probably. Ti would probably reflect too much on whether or not something made sense and Fe is always going to be too reactive to what other people want/need.

I think in me, it mostly comes out as NEEDING someone to understand why I think something or how things should be in my opinion. Like, if they disagree I need to understand and desperately need to make sure I haven't missed something. And if I haven't, I really want them to understand why I think what I think. I could see this as an Fe/Ti version of the sx 1 description. I am extremely passionate about how things should be and completely focused on what should be done to improve lives and experiences for other people. But I never trust myself enough to believe I'm absolutely 100% right. Ni+Fe+Ti PLUS the perfectionism of enneagram 1 seems to mean I never have any time to feel completely confident. I always assume I'm missing something. Looks like anxiety or insecurity to most people but it isn't negative for me, just comes from wanting to constantly understand everything better. So, asserting myself always takes the form of checking my work, in a sense.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,509 Posts
@ruskiix Reading your response, I was wondering if you ever looked into the differences between 1 and 6? I don't see what's biased towards Fi-Te in the description, personally. Like sure, I do think Chestnut is an Fi-Te type herself, but I don't see how this is going to affect the nature she's observed when it comes to sx 1s?

I am not much for subtype theory (I leave that for @Swordsman of Mana lol), but personally as I've come to understand and learn about myself better, I find that the sx 8 description isn't all too bad and incorrect when it comes to how I am as a person, for example.

As much as I think we know ourselves the best, I also think there's a danger in dismissing a description for being inaccurate because we do not ourselves see every facet of who we are.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
775 Posts
@ruskiix Reading your response, I was wondering if you ever looked into the differences between 1 and 6? I don't see what's biased towards Fi-Te in the description, personally. Like sure, I do think Chestnut is an Fi-Te type herself, but I don't see how this is going to affect the nature she's observed when it comes to sx 1s?

I am not much for subtype theory (I leave that for @Swordsman of Mana lol), but personally as I've come to understand and learn about myself better, I find that the sx 8 description isn't all too bad and incorrect when it comes to how I am as a person, for example.

As much as I think we know ourselves the best, I also think there's a danger in dismissing a description for being inaccurate because we do not ourselves see every facet of who we are.
Not sure I understand. Did you mean have I considered I might be a 6? My understanding of the difference is that while all types are driven by some kind of fear, 6s are focused on external threats to their inner state/selves/wellbeing, and 1s are more obsessed with internal threats to what they think their inner selves should be. I could be skewed a little by the 6s I know. I dated a counterphobic ENFP 6 and have two authoritarian ESFJ 6s in my family.

Maybe phrasing it as Fi Te bias is inaccurate. On my iPad or I'd skim but are there other INFJ sx 1s in here? It could just be that specific combination is a bit atypical, and it seems like an Fi Te divide to me because the more typical sx 1s use those functions more.
I've found the socionics INFp romance style description is spot on for me--I constantly challenge and provoke people to see of they'll rise to the occasion but it isn't to get them to act the way I think they should and it's rarely aggressive. My ENFJ mother does the same thing although her's is much more traditionally aggressive (she's either an sp or so 3). For me it actually works against my 1ish tendencies. Like, I'll push men I'm involved with to be very physical, mean, dominant, harsh, etc, when I don't think it's the kind of partner I could have an ideal relationship with--and the closest I get to this sx 1 description is pushing them to be the opposite. And it's a conflict I haven't sorted out yet--the person I think I should be and think my partners should be doesn't line up with what I try to make happen. (Less unhealthy in practice than it sounds and actually balances out the extremes of each impulse.)


Obviously I could just be overlooking some side of myself but it seems incredibly unlikely. I love hearing other opinions and theories about myself, though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,509 Posts
Not sure I understand. Did you mean have I considered I might be a 6? My understanding of the difference is that while all types are driven by some kind of fear, 6s are focused on external threats to their inner state/selves/wellbeing, and 1s are more obsessed with internal threats to what they think their inner selves should be. I could be skewed a little by the 6s I know. I dated a counterphobic ENFP 6 and have two authoritarian ESFJ 6s in my family.
The bolded is absolutely inaccurate; and the way you describe type 1 also seems off to me, and actually very well fits type 6. The problem I think, is how you actually emphasize "threat" to be of any particular importance at all to type 1. Being in the gut triad, the notion of "fear" and "threat" outside of how this plays out with the instinctual variants, is for most of the part, quite irrelevant. 6s, most of all above all else, fear themselves. Why do I write themselves? This has to do with that 6s, regardless of where they fall within their range of phobic or counterphobic (which is why I think the way to split type 6 like this is nonsensical because at the end of the day, a 6 is a 6), do not trust themselves and project this sense of personal distrust outwards - since they do not trust themselves, they find something external in which they can hold on to and believe in to be trustworthy instead of being able to rely on finding that inner guidance within themselves. A 6 may be extremely obsessed with what their inner self should be as a result, because it goes along with how they try to find sustenance in the world. They think, if they conform to certain standards of how to be, it means they are secure in this world because the people and systems whose standards they attempt to conform to, will not reject them, due to 6s fundamentally feeling extremely lonely and abandoned inside.

Maybe phrasing it as Fi Te bias is inaccurate. On my iPad or I'd skim but are there other INFJ sx 1s in here? It could just be that specific combination is a bit atypical, and it seems like an Fi Te divide to me because the more typical sx 1s use those functions more.
I think Fe-Ti and Fi-Te has absolutely no bearing on this, personally. Ultimately a 1 is a 1, and cognition is a secondary thing.

I've found the socionics INFp romance style description is spot on for me--I constantly challenge and provoke people to see of they'll rise to the occasion but it isn't to get them to act the way I think they should and it's rarely aggressive.
To be fair, @Zamyatin is also a victim in socionics, so you (and I as well) share romance styles, but he doesn't have the issue you have with not relating to this description of seeking to reform his partner in an aggressive way, and similarly, I, as an sx 8, can be extremely controlling over the people I interact with and expect them to conform to my demands as well. It comes with the gut type territory, sans type 9 for obvious reasons. Also, provoking people and see if they rise to the occasion honestly sounds like something a reactive type, and perhaps more so 6 and 8, would do. 6s challenge others to see where they stand, whether the people are gonna stick around or to unveil that person's true colors, and 8s challenge people because they need to get a rise out of their environment or because they in a way, similar to 6s, want to know what people are made of.

My ENFJ mother does the same thing although her's is much more traditionally aggressive (she's either an sp or so 3). For me it actually works against my 1ish tendencies. Like, I'll push men I'm involved with to be very physical, mean, dominant, harsh, etc, when I don't think it's the kind of partner I could have an ideal relationship with--and the closest I get to this sx 1 description is pushing them to be the opposite. And it's a conflict I haven't sorted out yet--the person I think I should be and think my partners should be doesn't line up with what I try to make happen. (Less unhealthy in practice than it sounds and actually balances out the extremes of each impulse.)
The reason why I actually suggested for you to look more into type 6 is because this sounds like classical type 6 vacillating behavior, to me. 6s are a lot like this in their intimate relationships with others - they may on the one hand, tell and do one thing, while secretly expecting and pining for, the other.
Obviously I could just be overlooking some side of myself but it seems incredibly unlikely. I love hearing other opinions and theories about myself, though.
I don't think you are per se overlooking sides, but I think you have found the wrong type to explain who you are, personally. If it doesn't fit, it may be because you are looking for the wrong thing to explain you and this isn't a fault of the theory or the description, but an error of misattribution from your end.
 
1 - 20 of 41 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top