|
|
Post by Roshan on Apr 6, 2020 20:18:56 GMT -5
This was a close friend of mine in high school. 4w3 with 9w1 and 7w6, probably so/SX.Interiorized image is definitely a thing.  |
|
hiddenglass
Swallow
lay me to rest, take me to sea // read my mind… let me be.
Posts: 179
Enneagram Core Fix: 5⁴
Relationship Status: searching
Occupation(s): idling
Education: ongoing
Interests: growing
Country/Region: chicago
|
Post by hiddenglass on Oct 28, 2020 1:47:29 GMT -5
This was a close friend of mine in high school. 4w3 with 9w1 and 7w6, probably so/SX.Interiorized image is definitely a thing. |
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on Oct 28, 2020 8:02:29 GMT -5
Yes, there was a photo in the OP hiddenglass . But occasionally photos will vanish for seemingly no reason. I don't seem to be able to copy the image from fb anymore. Here's a link. (EDIT: no more, see blow). The thing is I haven't seen her since 1976 but I was sure she was a social 4. She was very, very thin then and also very well-dressed and stylish. Almost 40 years later I find her photos and she's much heavier and much more 'ordinary' (she looked like a model) but she's still jumping out of her skin with extreme self-consciousness. 4w3(5w4). Interiorized image is a thing. |
|
hiddenglass
Swallow
lay me to rest, take me to sea // read my mind… let me be.
Posts: 179
Enneagram Core Fix: 5⁴
Relationship Status: searching
Occupation(s): idling
Education: ongoing
Interests: growing
Country/Region: chicago
|
Post by hiddenglass on Oct 28, 2020 15:45:02 GMT -5
Oh, it's possible we have mutual friends and I can see photos you can't see. Let me know if you can't see eight photos (one not of her, a 'meme') plus the cover and prof pic. |
|
|
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on Oct 28, 2020 16:09:58 GMT -5
She's a now 60-ish working/middle class half Puerto Rican girl from the Bronx who went to high school with me in Queens.
She's so/sx 497, nothing aggressive on the wings.
She is absolutely melting in self-consciousness.
Even in still photos you see the lag between her interiorized image of who she is and her introjection of how she believes she is being perceived. Everything comes filtered through this interiorized lens before it meets the other person.
Social 4 imploded. "Shame".
|
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on Oct 28, 2020 16:17:31 GMT -5
Anyway 479 has a 'light touch' but she is definitely so/SX 4w3.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on Oct 28, 2020 16:20:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on May 11, 2021 8:35:26 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on May 11, 2021 8:43:31 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on May 13, 2021 7:21:15 GMT -5
I feel like the whole issue of 4/2 line was suppressed in the discourse for years. For instance you would constantly hear how very Sixish stressed Nines were, how easy it was for them to be mistyped. Also how very Threeish 'Nines in the core' were. Obama 3 or 9 was a commonplace. Perhaps it took a bit more knowledge to see how similar Seven and Five could be but once you saw it couldn't be unseen and it was discussed. And so on with the rest. How Oneish and nitpicky stressed out Sevens can be...likewise Sevens with integrated high One can seem very Oneish, Ones with integrated 7 can be so buoyant...at low AND high levels it CAN be hard to distinguish between 7 and 1. The problem is I very rarely heard people talk about 2 at 4 and even less 4 at 2. Not to mention Naranjo's sp "Fourish" 2. In fact Four and Two CAN be really really hard to tell apart--as you would expect from ANY two types that move into each other.
I was aware the difficulty was being suppressed in part to peddle a sort of 4 = Ingmar Bergman, 2 = bakes cookies polarity, to truly have something to idealize and something to despise. And as I was of course also aware of the extreme overtyping of Four, I was willing to err on the side of undertyping for a while as I attempted to contribute to correcting this. I feel I'm at the next phase now and I have to take stock.
This especially because I'm starting to realize just what the implications of 'effusive' and 'histrionic' are and how easily they can be confused with the 'drama' of Four. So I need to cobble together some comments about all this.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on May 13, 2021 7:46:47 GMT -5
So Katherine Anne Porter is a 4. I could see it just by the first photo. So far nothing to contest that. I'm about to read her short stories. What will there be (will there be?) that situates her as so obviously and clearly 'not 2', not even 2-fixed, just no way, along with say a Tennessee Williams, a Bergman, a Mishima? edit: ugh this pdf doesn't really work... |
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on May 13, 2021 7:56:42 GMT -5
btw I mention those three in particular because they're widely used paradigmatic 4 typings that are in fact so obviously, so deeply drenched in 4 that even though I'm only sure one of them (Williams) leads with 4, one would have to have a complete lack of understanding of what 4 is, to be completely outside of that which is the 'bottom of the E' to....oh....idk...declare 'em all Sevens in one fell swoop. And yes, those who know will know that this is weighing heavily atm on my mind.
|
|
