#ichazo

[lauracoretypologies]

The societal SX-shaming - destigmatizing the vocalization of one's rawest desires

(The influence of social mirage on the collective superego of SX-blind folks)

One thing that has been bothering me for probably a longer time than I've realized is the stigmatization of the most primal, raw instinctual desires and needs by our society, in the name of "calling out toxic standards imposed by people like you (read, people in touch with their desires)."

In reality, this is mere pretense, made to camouflage how SX-blind folks are unable to get in touch with their sense of attraction and disgust enough to select their choices for themselves. When they see a person, mainly SX first or second, making selections solely on what attracts and repulses them, they often resort to discriminating against them by saying their personal standards and preferences are toxic, irrelevant or unhealthy.

And of course, it's easier for them to do that, in the name of social or political acceptance (see the SO and SP nature mixed in that, by the way?) than to admit to themselves, that they themselves have a sense of attractive and repulsive, but buried so deep down out of being socially correct and guilty, that they can't help but to moralize their sensual incompetence and label themselves as the proper SJWs.

In many SX-blinds, this tendency is so pathological that while they're okay seeing people making romantic selections based on "compatibility" and "values", the very same selection becomes toxic out of nowhere, once motivated by a sense of attraction and repulsion.

Not to mention the irrelevance and fallacies in their arguments. They confuse personal selection even for the most intimate relations for imposing toxic standards upon society, even if by not acting in a hypocritical manner, you're doing the exact opposite by being fair, justful, and *practicing your personal freedom's* to do so. After all, what they see is that you rejecting a certain trait somehow equals telling people to abide by your standards, even though you're simply choosing people who fit it and letting those who don't live as they are.

It's like a brunette crying that a man wants to date blonde and resorts to accusing him of imposing the standard of bleaching hair onto her. It's like nerds refusing to date brainless people so they accuse them of elitism. It's like experienced men whining that a physically pure woman is repulsed by a non-virgin man, intimately marked by someone else prior to her and accusing her of imposing purity standards onto him, as if purity can be regained by any effort. *Diabolical laughter*

But to them, this bigotry of demonizing decisions made based on repulsion/attraction principle is a way to cope with the fact that certain preferences unselect them. They're the ones suffering consequences of making decisions against their disgust and then paying with a breakup for it. Secretly, and often subconsciously, they envy SX types that they're able to make successful decisions based on desires and turn-offs, and it mirrors their inability to do so when they experience such envy.

They project their values and *options* onto others and the moment someone has standards that go beyond what they are, they feel inevitably discriminated against. Nevermind that you value them on a social level and simply disregard them romantically, as for them they don't see when it's romantic and when it's not. How dare you, (insert a name for either sexist, ageist, or whatever label they find for your ways).

And it's exactly this SX-blind confusion and type of thinking which develops these toxic standards. Because only a person who is capable of acting upon an entirely random person's desires and translate it into receiving basic human respect in the name of being socially respected and is exploiting their desire IS setting a societal norm out of nothing but the consumerist SP idea that you can get resources in return of living to someone's sexual ideals, or that somehow you can't financially survive without being everyone's type.

Of course, this goes both ways. There are also SX-blinds, who confuse their own desires for who is worthy of their basic respect and who is not, so they assume SX firsts are the same type of evil who do it openly. Whoops...

It's a very messed-up thinking, when in reality, no person will judge your societal worth based on *one's own personal* desire, disgust, demand or preference. You can be sexually unthinkable to someone and they can still respect you as a human. I wonder if these people either sexualize their moms, or think they're invaluable because they can't get intimately involved with them. *Smirk*

At the end of the day, they're nothing but fallen victims of their own system they complain so much about. SX types are the ones who recognize the subjectivity of attraction and repulsion and don't sell their icks as an objective moral failure, but it's the SX-blinds that IMPOSE what's acceptable to desire or what isn't. In other words, they *are* the toxic standard.

[phvle]

The Enneagram of Divine Forms — Point 6: The Adventurer

Total lack of faith in themselves, in other human beings, and in God

Thinks they are completely lost and alone in the world

For them it is hard to believe in the goodness of humanity, and also in their own goodness

Profoundly distrustful of God, humankind and even the world, and in a very deep sense, distrustful of the goodness of their own ability

Constant superstition and neurotic paranoia of being persecuted, misled, lied to, and even more

General attitudes of fear and stress, which gives them the outward appearance of being a ‘nervous wreck’

Because of this constant distrust, suspicion and fear, every single event or situation becomes an adventure of major proportions

Ego-delusion: that they are engaging in dangerous and fearful situations in which they are being used and exploited; because they have no faith in themselves, they have a cowardly attitude, think that their ongoing fear and stress become manifested by their suspiciousness and by their hostile outbursts and constant shortcomings, always being insecure and not knowing if they are choosing the best and the right path or situation; cowardice, they see everything across with exaggerated fear

Cynical point of view that everybody is actually moved only by self-interest and self-gratification

Internally very weak without any faith in themselves

Extremely inconsequential, inconsistent and capable of changing positions and points of view without warning

Applying their specific cynicism to their lack of consistency and consequence

Projection of believing they are useless in relation to their siblings or the world, which provokes tension in them

Passion of fear: passionately promote an internal state of fear by being distrustful and by believing they are in constant imminent danger

Striving and pushing on one side, lazy and indifferent on the other

Projection: their primary defense mechanism, by which unacceptable thinking, fears or behavior are rejected in themselves and projected onto another person, group, race or religion, without insight and acknowledgement of their own internal process

Self-defeating attitude

Assert to themselves: ‘I am responsible and relaxed’

Ego-reaction: become a libertine and an outgoing type of person to combat and hide their fear

Ego-justification: calculation, to accommodate their arguments for their own benefit

Uses panic in order to escape from situations that they cannot control

Agreeable on one side and overpowering on the other

Source: @/if u seek amy on PDB

[azycheese]

P6 note taking

6s have an inability to adapt, meaning to live in the moment and integrate it fully because they are constantly seeking to react to something, this stems from an inaptitude to trust their environnment because of a lack of stability that occured in their early childhood , as a result they do not feel secure enough to entirely let themselves go and develop a tendency to become hyperaware of what's happening around them

[subconsciousmysteries]

most brainletisms in the enneagram community come from thinking that Naranjo is the God of this system… he is really not. Pre-Naranjo and Pre-Ichazo there was the Sufis and Gurdijeff who imo had a much more coherent understanding of how enneagram works.

[ungirosutmblr]

[enneagrambias]

The gut triad, why wings matter, and the contradictory dynamics of interconnectedness

You can think of each point on the enneagram as the unique dynamic formed by the points it's connected to. This makes the triangle at the center and the people that embody it rather unique, since the sources of their worldviews directly overlap each other’s, forming a sort of Mexican standoff of motion and priorities. They are placed with less of a grasp on their own inner directive and approach each moment in a more generalized way.

With the intersection of the psychology of object relations with the enneagram, there is a new meta told by what Riso and Hudson call the dominant affect triads (attachment: 3-6-9, frustration: 1-4-7, and rejection: 2-5-8)¹. Only one of these groupings does not contain a connection point to the others, and it's again the triangle at the enneagram's center. It's because of this odd triad out that wings are not only an essential facet of the fully-expressed enneagram, but the very thing that ties it all together. The more time you spend with the types outside of this triangle, the more you may observe that their proximity to another triad (and the possibility of a wing in that adjacent triad) is not arbitrary, but a feature.

2 and 7, for instance, are closer to the gut triad because they are each the ‘guttier’ type in their respective triads. In other words, they’re closer than their heart and head cousins to knowing what they want -- even if they struggle with how -- and going after it. They both experience more immediate access to the gut triad, and each have a wing to the other’s gut line -- for 7w8s and 2w1s, the conflicting gut energies that result can be quite revealing, and a particularly apt example of how the enneagram captures the contradictory nature of people. Down at the enneagram’s nadir, on the other side, we see that 5 and 4 share a wing to each other, each being the most avaricious and self-distancing version of their triads.

In the cosmology told by the more spiritual enneagrammists such as AH Almaas² and Sandra Maitri³, 9 is more or less where it all begins. It's the center of the body or the gut triad, and each type in this center -- 8, 9, and 1 -- is the respective centerpiece of its dominant affect triad. We see that 9 immediately splits into its heart and head constituents (3 and 6), while its wings, 8 and 1, immediately split into 2 and 5, 4 and 7 respectively.

Oscar Ichazo originally coined the term 'trifix' to denote that one has a predominant fixation in each of the centers⁴. One can end up embodying a 1-2-7 or a 4-7-8 or even a 3-6-9 trifix as one’s motivations as a person and ego develop, cascade, and crystallize into adulthood. The most controversial aspect of trifix that I usually see discussed is that it’s too complicated or contradictory, lessening the meaning of what each type means. But people are messy and contradictory, and only when you embrace this does the enneagram become a lot more dynamic and free to more accurately describe that messiness and contradiction.

The foundational premise of the enneagram is, after all, the circle it’s contained within, which signifies that we already contain all 9 of these ways of being on some level. The whole thing is already there inside the collective unconscious. What we call someone’s 'type,' then, is the natural consequence of developing fixations, as an animal, that become recognizable and consistent enough to be worked with. It’s because we’re animals that we don’t really have a say in this matter, it just happens to us. It’s a language, and a powerful one, that we can use to communicate the different and common responses that we have to our existential predicament.

References:

Don Riso and Russ Hudson, Understanding the Enneagram: The Practical Guide to Personality Types (2000)

AH Almaas, Facets of Unity: The Enneagram of Holy Ideas (1998)

Sandra Maitri, The Spiritual Dimension of the Enneagram: Nine Faces of the Soul (2000)

Oscar Ichazo, Interviews with Oscar Ichazo (1982)

[ichijikanme]

Ichazo’s Enneagram: Type Five

Passion: Avarice Virtue: Detachment (Nonattachment) Fixation: Stinginess Holy Idea: Holy Omniscience, Holy Transparency

PASSION:

Avarice. The meaning of the word “avarice” is often misunderstood as it applies to type Five. Avarice is usually associated with greed, or the desire to accumulate worldly possessions; however, avarice does not necessarily express itself in materialistic ways. Avarice began to manifest in us when, as small children, we lost contact with our essential natures, and consequently felt small, tiny, and helpless in a vast, uncaring universe. This left all of us, and Fives especially, terrified of life and doubting our ability to function in the world. Thus, Avarice leads Fives to feel that they must retreat from reality or defend against it, while trying to restore the feeling that they are capable and competent to deal with this overwhelming situation. It leads to an emotional attitude of rejection and detachment — a turning away from the world as if one were not part of it. Avarice causes us to feel as though the universe has rejected us, so we better find a way to make do with our wits and with minimal support and resources.

Avarice is often confused with Gluttony, the Passion of type Seven. Gluttony seeks to fill the emptiness of the false self up with experiences and ideas from “outside.” Avarice is also based on a sense of inner impoverishment, but it copes by withholding the self, by shrinking back from contact, and by clutching at the little we think we already have because we are afraid of losing it. The ego self feels empty, rejected, and without nourishing sustenance so it hoards whatever it feels it has. Avarice is trying to retain in the self the resources and knowledge the ego believes it needs to function in the world.

Thus, Avarice in Fives is most often expressed as a kind of collector mentality, collecting more and more knowledge, reading more and more books, continually preparing so that Fives will be able to go out into the world with confidence.

VIRTUE:

Nonattachment. Although Ichazo’s original name for the Virtue at point Five is Detachment, we prefer the term “nonattachment” to distinguish it from the emotional detachment caused by schizoid withdrawal — the rejection of one’s feelings and need for nurturing. Nonattachment contains no hint of rejection; in fact, it requires a radical acceptance of reality. It is the quality described by the familiar spiritual injunction to “be in the world but not of it.” When we are present and abiding in our true natures, we do not cling to anything, inner or outer.

Particularly, we no longer need to cling to the endless activity of the mind as a source of identity and orientation to the world. We feel at one with the unfolding universe and as if we contain it within us at the same time. Everything touches and transforms us, yet there is nothing that we need to attach our identity to; our existence is not based on anything, not our thoughts, not our feelings, not our body, not our perceptions. Everything arises and disappears in a state of profound stillness and peace.

This state of nonattachment also gives us a profound compassion for all living things because we see their transient nature. When there is no need to attach ourselves to any view, it is easy to be compassionate and forgiving (“Tout comprendre, c’est tout pardonner” — “To understand all is to forgive all”).

FIXATION:

Stinginess. Stinginess refers to the ego mind’s tendency to hold on to experiences and information in an effort to build up knowledge and power and to maintain a familiar orientation with reality. It is as if the mind were stockpiling resources to prepare for some future catastrophe. Thus, Fives spend their time gathering information, skills, and resources to “build themselves up,” as if they were creating a separate space in which to prepare themselves to reenter reality.

The problem is that identifying with the mind this way detaches us from the support of our Being and from feeling connected with the world. Further, when Fives become trapped in constantly thinking that they need more and more information or skill before they can really live, it becomes increasingly difficult to get their lives started. It also becomes frightening to give, to be generous with one’s self. It’s as if Fives were thinking, “There is not enough of me even for me. If others want things from me, there won’t be anything left. I need time to learn how to live.” However, no amount of studying, learning, or hoarding makes them feel any more ready to deal with their lives.

HOLY IDEA:

Holy Omniscience, Holy Transparency. Holy Omniscience is a direct apprehension of the knowing-ness, the awake-ness of Essence. Essence experiences reality through our organism, through our senses and perceptions. Looked at from this perspective, the human being is like a sense organ for the Divine awareness. The universe knows itself through us. When we are present and abiding in our true nature, our minds become clear, and we know the immense, brilliant intelligence of Essence.

This clarification of the mind also results in the clarification of ego boundaries and mental categories: we “see through” boundaries, recognizing them as arbitrary inventions of the mind. Reality is a unity, but contains an infinite number of distinguishable characteristics. We can distinguish color, texture, form, and movement, but we do not see these phenomena as separate objects. Rather, we see both the endlessly transforming manifestation of reality as well as its underlying depths. We ourselves feel as if we are completely transparent -everything passes through us; nothing “sticks” in our consciousness. We perceive and understand reality with a penetrating, brilliant clarity that does not require the exertions of the ego mind.

Excerpt from “Understanding the Enneagram: The Practical Guide to Personality Types” (Riso)

[lauracoretypologies]

Art as an emotional prostitution in the domain of P3.

Because P3 doesn’t want to admit who they are in the darkest places of their being, they exploit and monetize this painful part of themselves in order to perform for the gaze of another’s eyes as someone skilled, artistic, *intentional* (hence the Ichazo’s domain of arts in P3). This is how they sell themselves away, controlled by gaze and desires of another. What’s "ugly" they turn, or make look artistic, undesired into lusted after, so that it can be sold as something positive, ideal, and perfect. This gives them the external reassurance that this is indeed how they are.

They sell their ugliest parts, *not only* to deny the fear they have of these parts sabotaging them when it comes to acquiring unconditional love (eg. failing by default, based on who they innately are) and to therefore have a reassured self-image, but *also because* the skill of attracting, convincing, influencing, or hypnotizing another eyes to pay attention to them that is of praise or admiration in result is a matter of not what you sell but *how you sell it.* Art is in the skill, not in talent. It’s of a greater value to be validated in what you’ve succeeded in, not in what you’ve won at birth.

And if they see that someone falls for their, weakest, "hideous" parts of who they are, they experience the idea of "unconditional" love, which is only a matter of illusion, and not truly unconditional either, since in their subconscious mind, it’s because they *managed* to twist ugly into beautiful, and eventually deceived the other person into thinking this is what they really are. I say what, not who, because they objectify themselves through their traits of efficiency at acquiring attention into doings, not simply living as beings.

Not to mention, if they were to admit someone else fell not for their maximized, twisted version of their shadow but for the shadow itself, that would in itself defy their ability to present themselves as effectively as they can.

Slowly, they sell out piece of themselves to others. The better they sell out their behavior labeled as their innate state, the more they will reassure not primarily their own idea of who they are but other people’s idea of who they should be. This is how they master succeeding being quintessential to whatever criteria they’re expected to meet. If not meeting those results in disappointment on the other side, the disappointment becomes mutual.

After all, love of another objectively matters more than their own. Despite how much they may love themselves, it will never be enough to compare to the validation the external source of love comes with. They live through the eyes of another, especially their chosen ones.

And because they don’t want to be touched by the gaze of the one who is not automatically driven to admire and desire their beauty, intellect, skills, and emotion, they sell themselves to a better target - eyes that supply them with a gaze, a person that provides them with no limit or condition.

A person, who unlike the former doesn’t see them as shameful, deficient, unvaluable, in their self-proclaimed weakness or gaps to be fixed, but considers such "flaws" as unique, adorable quirks. They want to master their world, ideals, fantasies, to shine in their eyes and soul above all, not to compete with the rest. They want to be a choice, not an option. They’re afraid of being a mere option even after being already chosen.

All of this becomes ironic to them when they realize that the love they wanted to earn unconditionally, by who they are, something as humble and pure as appreciation and desire for how they look, not just how they appear, and for who they are, not just for what they do, they end up desperately trying to acquire by conquering the condition it takes to satify external expectations, even of those people that aren’t close to them.

To them, regardless of how ambitious (even if on the basis of external applause) they are, they end up forgeting these goals of theirs. And so in the name of other’s gaze they’ve lost in their own eyes. It’s not their own goal of achieving love they fought for, it’s to be proven loveable at all.

Other’s feelings about them matter more than their own feelings of themselves. They feel through another’s tear, see through another’s eyes, live through another’s experience. This is not just a metaphor, this is a lifestyle, so ingrained that even if they say they hate themselves, they truly can’t. They only hate the fact their chosen audience hates them, or simply doesn’t like them the most of all.

I think it’s needless to say the way they exploit themselves, in the way of emotional nudity, isn’t exactly financial. What they’re buying is attention, addicted and hypnotized one at that - a gaze, by selling a piece of themselves to another cosplaying as something the other wants to see, an image and object of emotional satisfaction, not a being that isn’t always moldable and may refuse to comply with one’s wishes, because at the end of the day, that’s what it takes to have an illusion of love - to sell a peace of yourself immeasurable in value all because you cannot see the value in yourself.

"What’s the point of your gaze molesting someone’s flesh, if its beauty you can’t admire as much as their soul? You’ll use them without even being infatuated with them, discard them instead of consuming them, push them away rather than merging with them,"

Laura.