Terra Incognita

-Sarah- wrote: ↑Tue Apr 26, 2022 9:10 pm

There is something hokey about her and that's a quality that I associate with 2 rather than 3.

Roshan wrote: ↑Wed Apr 27, 2022 1:33 am

Amy wrote: ↑Sun Apr 24, 2022 10:56 pm . I also think she's FeSi, maybe TeSi, but I'd believe Te role over Te dominant if she's going to have a 3 over 2 fix.

?

3 correlates very highly with Te; 2 (especially 2w3) correlates very highly with Fe. So she's more likely to have Te dominant if she's a 3 and Te role if she's a 2.

I know it’s getting late here, but I’ll just add this quickly. I believe at the time I felt there was something about her that felt… prepared, like she could take advantage of different roles as ‘the woman’. (Maybe? I’m thinking off the top of my head). I’m trying to think of what exactly hit me as 3 over 2, but I think what contributed to it was that to me, both Te and 3 felt too polished and both Fe and 2 perhaps felt too… opened? However, I’m not so sure about that last part though now. I still think she’s an FeSi, but a heavy 3 wing with Te role may be enough to compensate for that 'preparedness'. Also, besides that, I don’t know why I didn’t why an sp first wouldn’t already be resourceful, and why an sp/so (possibly imo) is still ‘seducing’ so much with sx last. I think I just assumed Fe first compensated for all that, but with her declarations of ‘my husband is and love with you, and now my son is too’, it really doesn’t. I am starting to lean on that she’s not playing into different roles of ‘The Woman’, as Sarah put it, but instead knows how to take advantage of her being* ‘The Woman’/ seductress. (Even if it that changes with age. For example now she bestows the ‘helping with the hand of God’, which is admittedly very 2). I could be wrong about the stacking too, but it felt like despite her social/ humanitarian pursuits she still came off as being ‘resourceful’ first to me, as if she’s merely 'lending' herself to these social/ humanitarian pursuits. Perhaps she is social first though, but I still don’t see both sx and 2 lead together either way. The last thing I want to say on that is that I feel like I can see both the 2, and (maybe) the sp, but she doesn’t seem like a ‘me first’ 2 to me. So, I think that that’s the other thing that threw me off about her type being able to make ‘all of the pieces fit somehow’.

Okay, we have consensus but we still need to look for the clues of 2 > 3, and one verbal clue we didn't note is that she didn't just say in the third video at 4'58" that having an abortion is bigger than what Jesus suffered on the cross. She also said we can 'become billboards for the truth'.

This reeks of compliance lead. Or some 9 with high compliance, but it really sounds outside the scope of 3. 3 is Brad Stand's indignant protest: How am I not myself?

If and when a 3 realizes they are not themselves, they will strive to become 'The Authentic Person', not an emblem of an idea, no matter how sacred the idea is perceived as. This all seems far more in line with 'proud to be humble' than with countervanity.

Now energetic signals in the fourth video.

At 7'03" she makes this double thumbs up gesture she has done elsewhere too, including walking onto the stage for the interview in the second video.This gesture seems organic, second nature. I think with a non-integrating 3 it would seem more forced and an integrating 3 would not do it, or do it in a more flashy, dramatic way but with her it seems like it's just her, and this her is a cheerleader..

So this is something she's done early in two videos that to me seems specifically Two >>> 3 and then she is so 'poised' for so long that it could read as 3 lead, but I think this poise has a lot to do with having a 1 fix. Then once she has established pride of place with that poise, she seems to let her hair down and we get to peek more behind the 2 v. 3 curtain energetically.

So at 58'36", after she has (yet again) gone through her schtick about how before women told her their husbands were in love with her, but now they say their husbands and their sons, we get to see how she feels about it. A sheer unadulterated radiant smile of Pride in 'Daddy's Little Girl' basking in the spotlight. With attached 3 the line to 6 won't let their sense of exceptionalism slip out in this way. I think the extent of this self-exultancy is simultaneously too innocent and too self-absorbed for 3 Deceit.

Now watch starting at1 hour, the one actor starts gushing about what a privilege it was to make the movie and how she was the be all and end all; and again, for the second time in this video, she attributes her success to the musical score. The actor says "You're far too humble" and she laughs (something of a cackle she has at times that is a bit Hillaryesque). The question is why did she burst out laughing? It seems it hit too close to home. She has been visibly restraining herself not to swell up with pride, so 'proud to be humble', and this really hit, so she laughs as a tension release. Because she IS precisely 'far too humble'. I think a 3, including a countervanity 3, would know how take the praise more seamlessly because they've rehearsed it so many times in their head, so to say, and being told they were 'far too humble' would just be one more feather in their cap.

Then at around 1: 13' when she's tooting her own horn (not undeservedly) about her horse-riding charity, we see again how she restrains herself not to swell with pride, and she also does something else she did before--she licks her lips. This seems to be a little tick she has when she's trying to hide that she's basking in the glory of the spotlight, and I don't see why that would happen with Vanity.

It's like behind the curtain she's still like a little girl dressed up in mommy's clothes for daddy's attention and basking in pride that she tries to hide when she gets it. But she is subtly swollen with pride and this is how it leaks out. In other words, she never did become one with the act; it's still mommy's clothes.

With an actual 3 fix, there is a Deceit/Authenticity oscillation. The costume either really doesn't fit or you can't tell it's a costume at all, or at the highest levels, there isn't a costume anymore. The thing with her is she's wearing it, and it seems to fit, but it isn't really a costume. With dressing up for Daddy no one is really supposed to believe it ultimately. On the contrary, we should know this dress-up is a labor of love being compliantly bestowed upon us.

So she is a 2w3 Hostess. She's supposed to be acting and she's supposed to get tips and when she gets them it's supposed to be a gratitude exchange and if you look closely you can see her licking her lips thinking about what to do with the dollars in her garter belt, so to say. The pride is subtler than with many, but it's swollen anyway. I think the 1 fix is probably responsible for more 'counterpride' and the sheer competency of 1 amplifies the Threeishness.

Anyway those are the energetic moments I wrote down as specifically revealing 2>>> 3 when I first viewed the video--though in revisiting it, I tend to agree with -Sarah- that more and more, the pride, that is to say the Two, is just there and 'can't be unseen'. I do think a lot of the problem is we had not yet dealt with a 2w3 with a 1 fix and fwiw in this configuration I'd say the head is 7 all the way in 6 rather than 6 fix, along with an sx last, hence Sixish, stacking, making a sixlike 127 'teacherly' tritype sans actual 6 fix. I doubt she's triple compliant. That was a lot of husbands and horses.