| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Sebastian
Member
138 Posts |
 Posted - 06 Dec 2011 : 03:07:14 AM
|
I'm wondering how other sx lasters feel in relations to their biological sex and their identification with their gender. I don't feel a strong connection to being a woman, it just isn't something that crosses my mind. Seems to me more like hair color than part of my soul or identity. I mean, sure, it's there, it's just not a big factor in how I relate to the world or make my decisions or, I dunno, what does gender normally do?
In conversations I've had with an sx firster, they are flabbergasted that I think identity precedes gender, because, (likely) sx firsters identify much more strongly with their sex and their being a sexual being.
Is this true across the board? Or just a fluke from my small sample size? |
|
|
enneathing
Member
4622 Posts |
Posted - 06 Dec 2011 : 03:34:54 AM
|
quote:
Seems to me more like hair color than part of my soul or identity.
Yeah.
I think there is definitely some truth to this.
sx - gender expression, in some way. |
 |
|
|
AstralScream
Member
2742 Posts |
Posted - 06 Dec 2011 : 04:37:01 AM
|
I don't identify that strongly with being a woman, either. I'm extremely ambivalent about my gender identity, though. It drives me crazy, whereas you seem to view it as a triviality.
quote:
sx - gender expression, in some way.
Maybe. I can only say that it's a constant source of confusion and irritation for me. I never viewed it solely as an sx-first issue, though I'm sure it's channeled through the sx in many ways. I knew several other people who were equally as conflicted about their gender/sex, and they were all sx-first.
quote:
Seems to me more like hair color than part of my soul or identity.
Heh. I haven't seen it that way, at all.
|
|
|
|
Veiled One
Member
5590 Posts |
Posted - 06 Dec 2011 : 06:34:15 AM
|
While it does depend on type and fixes even more, I will generalize as such:
strong sx---androgynous (strong expression of both genders in one individual)
weak sx---undifferentiated or 'socialized'.
8w7 soc/sx, because sexual fives suck |
Edited by - Veiled One on 06 Dec 2011 06:35:48 AM |
|
|
|
enneathing
Member
4622 Posts |
Posted - 06 Dec 2011 : 08:12:12 AM
|
I agree with VO - a stronger sx leads to the expression of sx through some kind of gender identity, it could be strongly leaning towards either one of the 'genders' or a combination of the two - possibly leading to 'ambivalence' as Astral described.
I was wondering if maybe sx/soc tends to express or cultivate a gender identity that is more in line with cultural norms, society's expectations, than sx/sp, due to the strong social instinct influencing how the sx is expressed. Of course it could also depend on type, for example it's like a sx/sp 6 would would possibly have a more 'stereotypical' gender dientity, a sx/soc 4 a less conventional.
As for sx last, I agree they are undifferentiated, or I found if they are masculine/feminine it is not so much a way of expressing their sx instinct, consciously or actively through the gender identity, but rather a default thing for them. |
Edited by - enneathing on 06 Dec 2011 08:16:45 AM |
|
|
|
queen
Member
158 Posts |
Posted - 06 Dec 2011 : 10:14:58 AM
|
not sx last. sx/so or sx/sp
my gender identity comes across as mostly masculine. except in the case of romantic relationships, where my partners have always commented that i am both strongly masculine and strongly feminine. i definitely come across as masculine at the start of a relationship and reveal a more feminine side later. none of this is planned.
my bf finds that one of my most attractive qualities is my high level of comfort with my forcefulness/my 'masculinity'./laughs/ i have never made any efforts to tone this down, never will. it easily separates the delicious wheat from the chaff.
personally, social constructs like gender inspire more yawning than anything else. |
|
|
|
Veiled One
Member
5590 Posts |
Posted - 06 Dec 2011 : 11:21:00 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by enneathing
I agree with VO - a stronger sx leads to the expression of sx through some kind of gender identity, it could be strongly leaning towards either one of the 'genders' or a combination of the two - possibly leading to 'ambivalence' as Astral described.
sx leaks through ordinary gender constructs imo. So it will be harder for them to contain it within socially acceptable forms of 'gendered' personal expression.
You might notice that the most macho actors/performers so to speak in the stereotypical masculine gendered way are sx-last, not sx-first. Compare John Wayne, Chuck Norris, and Arnold (all sx-last) to Humphery Bogart, Lou Reed, or Jean-Claude van Damme (all sx-first).
8w7 soc/sx, because sexual fives suck |
Edited by - Veiled One on 06 Dec 2011 11:22:30 AM |
|
|
|
enneathing
Member
4622 Posts |
Posted - 06 Dec 2011 : 11:54:08 AM
|
Yes. Though, some of the most masculine females I knew were a sx 2w3 and a sx 4w3 (the 2w3 was more overtly masculine, the 4w3 androgynous strongly leaning towards masculine with some more feminine characteristics, like some of her style). So the 'gender expressions' can go either way... perhaps with sx first it is more an expression of sexuality. I think a sx last could be either masculine or feminine but with them it's less about the expression of sexuality through gender identity - I don't think it's necessarily about conforming to social norms for sx last either, because I didn't think this was a great focus for me anyway.
In sx first, there is often a strong pronounced gender expression, and as you say it could be androgynous but it could also be strongly masculine or feminine too.
|
Edited by - enneathing on 06 Dec 2011 12:00:51 PM |
|
|
|
Sebastian
Member
138 Posts |
Posted - 06 Dec 2011 : 12:19:46 PM
|
To clarify, I mean specifically gender identification, not its expression or ones incidental falling into the archetype of gender roles.
When someone is transexual it means that they identify with the other gender, and they want their expression to match their identity. I'm saying I don't really have an identity in that domain, so its expression is fairly irrelevant. Perhaps I am masculine or feminine or androgynous, but the number of characteristics I have ticked in each of those categories is fairly incidental. Masculine and feminine are descriptors for behavior that may or may not have to do with how one identities themselves.
Society may see many sx last actors as extremely masculine, but that doesn't indicate how those actors internally identify with their being a gendered human.
|
|
|
|
Veiled One
Member
5590 Posts |
Posted - 06 Dec 2011 : 12:28:09 PM
|
Aren't you the one who said that a lot of people in your church talked constantly about relationships, thus they are sx-first?
I will whisper a secret to you: most of them are probably not sx. Churches are not the place where sx-firsters congregate and flock to, shhhhh....
We need to look way beyond what they talk about when it comes to stacking. And most happily married or involved people aren't sx either, just by virtue that there are fewer of them (the sx-firsters).
Many sx-firsters are single and have problems with 'doing' romantic relationships. For different reasons from a sx-last, yes, but sx does not make romance easier.
8w7 soc/sx, because sexual fives suck |
|
|
|
Rich
Member
USA
3915 Posts |
Posted - 06 Dec 2011 : 12:30:36 PM
|
My wife and I are both SP-SO-SX, and we do not experience what you are going through, Akimo. I would say we match pretty good , what R & H say about SX-last, its hard to get too excited about much of anything....  And, when we do get stimulated by something, it soon fades away, its just too hard to maintain that high level of arousal.
 / 
ISTJ & SP-3W4, DISC:High-DSC
Serious-Sensitive-Inventive-Leisurely Styles
HER:SP-2W1 & ISFJ; Self Sacrificing-Dramatic-Conscientious-Aggressive styles
My philosophy of life: Love will get you through.
I learned to dissemble at an early age. |
Edited by - Rich on 06 Dec 2011 12:33:40 PM |
|
|
|
enneathing
Member
4622 Posts |
Posted - 06 Dec 2011 : 12:30:54 PM
|
quote:
To clarify, I mean specifically gender identification, not its expression or ones incidental falling into the archetype of gender roles.
When someone is transexual it means that they identify with the other gender, and they want their expression to match their identity. I'm saying I don't really have an identity in that domain, so its expression is fairly irrelevant. Perhaps I am masculine or feminine or androgynous, but the number of characteristics I have ticked in each of those categories is fairly incidental. Masculine and feminine are descriptors for behavior that may or may not have to do with how one identities themselves.
That's not what I was talking about either.
In fact, I was saying that sx first, imo, is more identified with some sort of gender expression, whether it is both or one of them.
'I'm saying I don't really have an identity in that domain, so its expression is fairly irrelevant.'
Yeah, that's what I'm saying too - sx first does have an identity in that domain, a stronger identification, and it is to do with expressing sexuality through this gender identification. But the social male/female roles are very constrictive and often superficial, so of course the expression will go beyond that, or will not neatly fit into the one category.
|
Edited by - enneathing on 06 Dec 2011 12:37:20 PM |
|
|
|
Veiled One
Member
5590 Posts |
Posted - 06 Dec 2011 : 12:41:15 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by enneathing
Yes. Though, some of the most masculine females I knew were a sx 2w3 and a sx 4w3 (the 2w3 was more overtly masculine, the 4w3 androgynous strongly leaning towards masculine with some more feminine characteristics, like some of her style). So the 'gender expressions' can go either way... perhaps with sx first it is more an expression of sexuality. I think a sx last could be either masculine or feminine but with them it's less about the expression of sexuality through gender identity - I don't think it's necessarily about conforming to social norms for sx last either, because I didn't think this was a great focus for me anyway.
As I said....they can lean more toward 'undifferentiated' (like you and akimo, I suppose) or alternatively, 'socialized' (identifying with social roles). The 'socialized' form can be seen in those macho actors who aren't expressing sexual masculinity as they are social masculinity---the social ideals of it.
8w7 soc/sx, because sexual fives suck |
|
|
|
Sebastian
Member
138 Posts |
Posted - 06 Dec 2011 : 12:52:21 PM
|
@enneathing my clarification wasn't directed specifically at you, mostly just a general response to things. I think expression is tied to identity so there will be overlap as is clear in your comments. I was afraid of moving only into the territory of expression (not because of your comments) so I said something before it got to that point.
@Veiled one - I had to look it up to make sure, but I did say that people in my church tend to be obsessed with romantic relationships, but I didn't say they were all sx first, just that it made me uncomfortable and uncertain that that is such a common topic. I'm inclined to agree that there are not a lot of sx firsters at church.
I also mentioned an sx first friend I had from college whose views on intersex friendships startled me. (Unless there is another thread I'm forgetting about.)
|
|
|
|
randy mizer
Member
213 Posts |
|
|
enneathing
Member
4622 Posts |
Posted - 06 Dec 2011 : 1:28:05 PM
|
| That thread came to mind, but this thread more specifically addresses the issue of 'sx last and gender identity'. |
|
|
|
Veiled One
Member
5590 Posts |
Posted - 06 Dec 2011 : 1:31:12 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by akimo
@Veiled one - I had to look it up to make sure, but I did say that people in my church tend to be obsessed with romantic relationships, but I didn't say they were all sx first, just that it made me uncomfortable and uncertain that that is such a common topic. I'm inclined to agree that there are not a lot of sx firsters at church.
I also mentioned an sx first friend I had from college whose views on intersex friendships startled me. (Unless there is another thread I'm forgetting about.)
I will feel every bit as uncomfortable and misunderstood when standing around a group of people talking nonstop about their romantic relationships (the horrors!). I don't think it is a sx-last thing to feel uncomfortable that way. The idea of talking about romantic relationships within the context of the church though....(the horrors! the horrors!)
I tend to keep my big mouth shut when it comes to the topic, if only because I feel so easily misunderstood on that front. I get into some serious envious and self-pitying stint dying a bit inside, actually, and I always thought I suffered just a bit more than they who broadcasted their romance around.
8w7 soc/sx, because sexual fives suck |
|
|
|
AstralScream
Member
2742 Posts |
Posted - 06 Dec 2011 : 4:59:48 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by akimo
To clarify, I mean specifically gender identification, not its expression or ones incidental falling into the archetype of gender roles.
When someone is transexual it means that they identify with the other gender, and they want their expression to match their identity. I'm saying I don't really have an identity in that domain, so its expression is fairly irrelevant. Perhaps I am masculine or feminine or androgynous, but the number of characteristics I have ticked in each of those categories is fairly incidental. Masculine and feminine are descriptors for behavior that may or may not have to do with how one identities themselves.
Yes, that's what your post brought to mind for me. I don't think it's just sx-firsts who can be transsexual, but in my experience it's a definite trend. I have never personally known a transsexual (and I've talked to quite a few, actually) who didn't seem sx-first to me. To get as far as to pursue gender reassignment surgery, that person had to be putting a lot of energy, meaning, and significance on that aspect of life. You simply can't go into that on a whim. I can see how an sx-last might feel somewhat similar about their gender identity, but just not have that burning drive to do something about it.
I don't completely identify with male-ness, either. But, if I did there's a good chance I would be pursuing the full expression of that. Lucky me, I don't have to go through hell like most transsexuals do. |
|
|
|
The Wayfarer
Member
USA
4432 Posts |
Posted - 06 Dec 2011 : 5:09:39 PM
|
I identify with the androgynous aspect of what V.O. mentioned above and I'm sexual last...I can feel the influence of both male and female energy within me, which flares at various times.
(I self type as 4w5 sp/so/sx)
I am attracted to both men and women (sexually more attracted to men, relationally more attracted to women, although this has varied as well)....
My sexual instinct is really palpable for me, although it's difficult for me to express it around others, the energy is contained, or walled. I wouldn't say appropriate but more that people can be uncomfortable because it is sort of locked inside my own insular self protection. I used the analogy in another thread of feeling a lot like a caged lion in reference to sexual prospects or in relation to the sexual instinct, so it's quite animalistic with me, sex is just sex on many levels, I could in many instances do without the intimacy part, and certainly don't like to mix the two as a general rule. I see sex in a lot of ways like food, while conversely greatly romanticize intimate union on a non-physical level. However when the two mix you often end up with a sort of romantic/sentimental interaction which makes me truly annoyed.
The Wayfarer
"Time is a factory where everyone slaves away earning enough love to break their own chains.”-Hafiz
|
|
|
|
whitelila
Member
5188 Posts |
Posted - 06 Dec 2011 : 5:53:42 PM
|
quote:
I will feel every bit as uncomfortable and misunderstood when standing around a group of people talking nonstop about their romantic relationships (the horrors!). I don't think it is a sx-last thing to feel uncomfortable that way. The idea of talking about romantic relationships within the context of the church though....(the horrors! the horrors!)
lol
|
|
|
|
enneathing
Member
4622 Posts |
Posted - 07 Dec 2011 : 12:36:44 AM
|
quote:
I identify with the androgynous aspect of what V.O. mentioned above and I'm sexual last...I can feel the influence of both male and female energy within me, which flares at various times.
VO also mentions that it can depend on type, and she has said before that Fours often tend to have an androgynous streak. |
Edited by - enneathing on 07 Dec 2011 12:40:17 AM |
|
|
|
loscust
Member
414 Posts |
Posted - 08 Dec 2011 : 7:01:58 PM
|
Being a "sexual being" doesn't mean you'll have a very clear-cut gender identity. I know of some people who are very sexual whose orientation is bisexual and they don't have any strong identification with either gender.
I'm sx-primary and I can't say that I strongly identify with my biological sex. I'v never questioned it but it is not something I focus on or overtly express. I've found that it mostly has to do with my MBTI/socionics type. There are a few types that are strongly masculine or feminine, and so it happens that my MBTI/socionics type is set against my biological gender, thus even though I'm sexual instinct I've never strongly associated with it and have gone against typical gender-prescribed roles.
Discover your sociotype:http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/content.php |
Edited by - loscust on 08 Dec 2011 7:04:39 PM |
|
|
|
Sebastian
Member
138 Posts |
Posted - 12 Dec 2011 : 01:12:04 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by whitelila
quote:
I will feel every bit as uncomfortable and misunderstood when standing around a group of people talking nonstop about their romantic relationships (the horrors!). I don't think it is a sx-last thing to feel uncomfortable that way. The idea of talking about romantic relationships within the context of the church though....(the horrors! the horrors!)
lol
So funny it's not even funny. It really is truly horrifying. I've lost friends in the church for my veiws on relationships. I can't even.
Thanks all for your input. I tend to take info in a mull for a while, so I have been lurking on my own thread.
Seems like for me, it may be more likely due to 4ness than stackings, but can be true for people of any type/stack.
@locust Do you think for people on the ends of the kinsey scale that sexual desire is more likely tied to gender identity? |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
sx last and gender identity
